It's washed out and there's not much to see.
1985 white tube C8, Celestron f/6.3 reducer/corrector, Sony a6000, ISO 100, 1/350s, 128/205 lights stacked, 52 flats + dark flats. Stacked in Autostakkert, processed in GIMP, Astra Image, and paint.net.
I've seen the same comment several times recently, advising beginners not to bother imaging the full Moon because it's washed out and there's not much to see. O'Really. Challenge accepted. I really wanted to focus on bringing out terrain color and detail in the absence of any "3D effect", as it was put to me. The seeing was forecast to be on the bad side of poor, so I eschewed the ASI183MC and stuck with the Sony a6000 and it's larger pixels. I shot over 200 lights and I'm glad I did because I had to be pickier than normal for this image scale. I know from experience that this camera absolutely requires flats for lunar photography because there is a very noticeable vertical gradient at the top of the frame with high shutter speeds, and it shows up as the top of the Moon turning a moldy green cheese color when you stretch it. So I shot flats, but inadvertently shot about 20 more than I normally would have, so 52 flats. I probably could have used the flats as-is, but thought what the heck, let's do it right, and shot the same number of bias frames. Except I forgot to reset the shutter speed, so 52 dark flats it is. :Op
Click for the full resolution image on Astrobin.