catching the light of the moon

The link in post #4 gives some good information on the physics behind moonlight and the perception of it.

Here in Australia 90+cri 4000k bulb are common but the tints seems much cooler than a 4000k maybe its the white plastic diffuser they use.

Djozz, do you have a jar big enough to fit your spectrometer?

If so, you should take another measurement, and take pictures of the process. Because it would prove that you actually caught moonbeams in a jar.

That sounds like a wonderful thing to do.
I do have a jar big enough, but how to push the button while the spectrometer is inside?, sure the moonbeams will try to escape if I keep the lid off. :slight_smile:

The light from the moon is reflected sunlight , :student:

The ambient light from the moonlight is so dim that you are using your rod cells, not your cone cells, hence you are not perceiving that the ambient light is in fact warmer/yellower than the ambient light under sunlight (light of the sun + light from the sky (blue)).

Yeah I assumed that was the case, djozz replied with a pretty good link in post #4.

As others have said, I’ve always found this to be the sweet spot for CCT at night time and roughly 3B tint for daytime (about 5200K). The latter is apparently the CCT at sunrise/sunset … It’s always cool to see these preferences and ‘attractions’ be correlated to things in nature.

I've heard Jon Slider talking about this too and have problems understanding people talking about using flashlights during the day ...Just makes no sense to me .If i use a flashlight in the day it's for 11 seconds to find my pen that fell behind the stereo speaker.tint isn't an issue at that point . where do people use a light in the day ?

This thread got me thinking about how the amount of moonlight (reference a full moon at latitudes < 40 degrees from the equator) compares to what we call “moonlight mode” (typically less than a lumen). Perhaps a different thread?

stupid thread got me doing a 6 hr study on black body and quantum physics.

Thanks now i'm more confused .

reading is hard

Last night I recorded another full moon:

Apparently the one full moon is not the other. This time it was warmer, 3400K. The luxvalue was lower than the first recording in september last year. It is attractive to speculate that more haze in the atmosphere (the sky looked very bright though) caused more scattering (affects blue the most) and warming up the CCT. Or the moon was lower than last time (it was), so the light travels a longer distance through the atmosphere, again more scattering.

Whatever the reason, the CCT of moonlight seems pretty variable, but the CRI is invariably high. Let’s wait for a very high moon next time and see what the CCT does then.

This was very interesting, I had no idea this could be done. Thank you.

Funny how no one mentioned the positive DUV. I’m surprised you guys can stand to go outside without it being rosy negative DUV :person_facepalming:

That’s why I wear Lee minus green filters in my glasses :sunglasses:

Nice read Djozz, looking forward to the next.

MAybe they are using a new clone moon emitter :slight_smile:
T
The Chhinaaa man must have caused it. LOL

I just saw that as an explanation for why this month’s full moon looks more pink — it rises only to the lowest angle above the horizon.

I’ve seen some wonderful outdoor time exposures of Yosemite waterfalls made with moonlight. They make “moonbows” too dim for the eye that cameras can capture.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&channel=tus&q=moonbow+yosemite&oq=&aqs=

There’s no need to mention it.

Everyone already knows the moon is made of green cheese.


So now it is half a year later because very high moons only occur in winter. It is two and a half weeks after midwinter, with full moon within half an hour of its highest point, less than 20 degrees from straight above. Is the tint significantly cooler than the low moon in summer?

It was to be expected: just like the sun, the moon tint is coolest when it is high above the horizon, lower duv too :slight_smile: . The sky was clear but not completely haze-free so perhaps an even bit higher CCT could have been obtained.