Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Watching some of the YouTube videos of the enclipse, it looks like it was a good eclipse to watch from many locations. Unfortunately the original livestream I watched of it was from Niagara Falls, where they only got about a 5 second view of it through the clouds. But watching other videos I see people in Texas and the Midwest got some great views of it.
Reports were that the eclipse was 99% of totality for my location. Sat outside in a lawn chair, back to the sun (no eclipse glasses for me). Things got noticeably dimmer, but I could still see very well; at best it was akin to an overcast Midwestern November sky, even though there weren't very many clouds in the sky during the eclipse.
I think it was important to realize...the "9x%" referred to the amount of "Ball of Sun" (apparently) covered by the moon. Lots of folks mistook that to mean "Amount of Daylight Stopped from Hitting the Ground."
It would seem ya only need about 3% of Sun hitting the ground to get at least 50% of the daylight you're used to. This is partially because the sun is dang bright, as it turns out, but also because there are reflections from the clouds, the atmosphere, many other things - it ain't dark til it's dark. It's like being 99% pregnant.
We knew this going in from 7 years ago - I tried very hard to explain it to as many people as I could, but a whole lotta local folks even experienced 99% - without leaving their yard - and were disappointed. They did not drive anywhere...because "Hey, we're getting 99%."
If you didn't have your glasses on, it was pretty much impossible to sneak a glance at the sun until the very moment of totality. It was that flipping bright - even at 99% covered. On the other hand, my camera (phone) was absolutely unaffected by this, and took some great photos, internet be darned!
I was very happy with my experience, being just outside the path of totality. Although the weather ultimately cooperated, it was far too variable to justify leaving work early enough to get into the path of totality. I still got a couple OK shots of the diamond ring effect, and several filtered shots of the sun partially obscured.
I'm not saying totality wasn't even more amazing, but my experience was still pretty magical. 3:00-3:30 was one of the fastest half-hours of my life.
I was very happy with my experience, being just outside the path of totality. Although the weather ultimately cooperated, it was far too variable to justify leaving work early enough to get into the path of totality. I still got a couple OK shots of the diamond ring effect, and several filtered shots of the sun partially obscured.
I'm not saying totality wasn't even more amazing, but my experience was still pretty magical. 3:00-3:30 was one of the fastest half-hours of my life.
I wouldn't miss totality by a few miles. I've seen a partial and an annular. The total is 1000% better. The thin clouds kept me from seeing any stars though. A girl at work asked me when the next one was. I told her Iceland in 2026 and now she's planning a trip there.
A girl at work asked me when the next one was. I told her Iceland in 2026 and now she's planning a trip there.
I recently looked for future total eclipses. Totality for the 2026 eclipse in Iceland is only about 1 1/2 minutes, and in Reykjavik it's about one minute. The website below also shows a high chance of clouds.
In 2027 there's one visible from the south coast of Spain and north coast of Africa. Marbella, Spain looks like a good alternative. Totality lasts 3m 20s and chance of clouds is low. There are some other places where totality is longer, but not as friendly with respect to cloudiness.
Then in 2028 there's one visible in Sydney, Australia. Totality will last 3m 49s. Website shows 47% chance of clouds.
There are a few others, but I'd only travel someplace I want to visit anyway. Those two are the most interesting to me, both from the eclipse point of view and the vacation angle.
I think it was important to realize...the "9x%" referred to the amount of "Ball of Sun" (apparently) covered by the moon. Lots of folks mistook that to mean "Amount of Daylight Stopped from Hitting the Ground."
It would seem ya only need about 3% of Sun hitting the ground to get at least 50% of the daylight you're used to. This is partially because the sun is dang bright, as it turns out, but also because there are reflections from the clouds, the atmosphere, many other things - it ain't dark til it's dark. It's like being 99% pregnant.
We knew this going in from 7 years ago - I tried very hard to explain it to as many people as I could, but a whole lotta local folks even experienced 99% - without leaving their yard - and were disappointed. They did not drive anywhere...because "Hey, we're getting 99%."
If you didn't have your glasses on, it was pretty much impossible to sneak a glance at the sun until the very moment of totality. It was that flipping bright - even at 99% covered. On the other hand, my camera (phone) was absolutely unaffected by this, and took some great photos, internet be darned!
Exactly. I think the problem is that people watch these stupid filtered videos too much. Oh look at the pretty diamond ring. Yeah well that is just an effect of the filter. That's not what the eclipse looks like to the naked eye, or even to an unfiltered camera. Even with 100% of the face of the sun blacked out, there is still more than enough light to illuminate everything. It looks just like twilight just after the sun sets. In most states it's still legal to drive without your headlights on until a half hour after sunset.
I watched one eclipse video made by a woman in Texas. It was just amature unfiltered camera phone video she took from her home right on the edge of the totality and the video was consistent with a video from the edge of totality. The sun was completely blacked out. Yeah I get it. Her home was just inside the area of totality, so it was convenient for her to just stay home. Why travel to the center line?
Well one reason I can think of. She panned the camera around in a 360 degree view to illustrate how in one direction everything was dark (twilight) and the other direction everything was bright daylight. That to me is the 50% mark, even though it qualifies as 100% totality. Yeah it's better then not seeing totality at all. But still not as good as it could be.
A second reason. The length of the eclipse varies everywhere inside the area of totality. It's longer at the center line then it is at the edges. And when I watched the 2017 eclipse just a few miles off of the center line, the people around me I think were really happy and excited. Then the disappointment set in the second it was over. I heard several people near me say "That's it? It's over?" The length of totality didn't surprise me. I knew what to expect. But I think the majority of people there were surprised at how quickly it was over.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
