[nelblu]

Awesome! I'm driving myself to Kouchibouguac to experience the totality. Considering that maritimes is always cloudy during this time of the year I'm not expecting much of a "view" but just want to experience the total darkness. Where we live (NS) we are getting about 95% darkness but I figured a couple of hours drive is worth to experience 100%!

[xattt]

The adage I’ve heard is that 90+% eclipses only give you 10% experience of totality.

I’m in Charlottetown, and I’ll be driving to North Cape (as will the rest of the Island). Between worrying about the weather, I’m also concerned that I won’t be able to get to North Cape in the first place.

So far, I managed to beat the solar glasses rush by ordering in January. I’m trying to figure out the timing to get to North Cape early enough to have a spot to park, but not too early that my kids will lose their minds with the waiting.

[Stratoscope]

More accurately, any partial eclipse gives you 0% of the experience of totality.

During totality, you see the Sun's corona with your own eyes.

In any partial phase, you are seeing the Sun's photosphere - the same bright surface of the Sun you see on every clear day. So you need eye protection.

When the Moon completely blocks the photosphere in totality, you get to see the much fainter solar corona. The corona is only about as bright as a full Moon.

You don't need and should not use solar glasses during totality. Don't take my word for it, if you get them go out at night and look at the Moon through them (doesn't have to be full).

Your kids are fairly young? You want to keep them safe during the partial phases, and also make sure they get to view totality unfiltered.

There was a lengthy discussion on Reddit the other day, nominally about photography but also about viewing with your own eyes:

https://old.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1bk7f0l/total_...

It bums me out that there is so much misinformation going around about eclipse viewing safety, specifically the notion that you should wear eclipse glasses during totality.

In that same Reddit thread, someone cites a misinformed New York Times article. I'll link it here because it was downvoted and hidden and is worth a quick read (along with our replies) to see how badly mistaken a major news publication can be:

https://old.reddit.com/r/photography/comments/1bk7f0l/total_...

[scd31]

Absolutely. I've never experienced a total eclipse before but I hear the difference between 95% and 100% is stark; due to the logarithmic nature of the human eye. I'm not even sure if 95% coverage would even be noticeable without eclipse glasses.

I'm from NS myself (Halifax) and have been trying to convince my parents to drive up to NB to see the eclipse. I'll be home for Easter so that'll probably be my last attempt!

[ars]

Even 99% is barely noticeable. Totality is a different category, it's not just "a bit darker".

And a camera is not the same experience as looking around and being in a circle of darkness with a lit horizon in all directions.

[xattt]

Yes, the experience associated with a picture is what matters. Even if it’s a live stream of the eclipse, it’s not too different that looking at photos/videos of other eclipses online.

You need to feel the change in air and the sounds to get the whole experience.

[nelblu]

haha took me a couple of attempts to convince my wife too. I'm so looking forward to it though!