Full Earth view from ISS Cupola Impossible 100 percent Fake

a reply to: elephantstone

If you are arguing that we would be able to see the entire Earth for the ISS, and the cupola, you are wrong. I have already proven this, NASA themselves say it is not possible because you are not high enough.

Again, this is not relevant at this point. The pics I posted show a portion of the Earth, explain why a portion of Earth looks like a perfect sphere with space around it.

a reply to: WaxingGibbons

You are simply wrong. Lens DOES factor in quite heavily, and refusal to accept this, will prevent you from being correctly informed, making your every statement on subjects relating to space and its exploration, a great deal more likely to be utterly and completely flawed.

In order for the full face of the Earth to be impossible to photograph with a fish eye lens, it would have to be concave, and the ISS suspended right in the middle of the depression. That, of course, is ludicrous, because were it the case, then there would be no horizon. To stand on the center of the Earth would be like standing in the middle of a skate bowl.

Obviously, that is not the case.

a reply to: WaxingGibbons

And I changed my post. Not fast enough I guess.
I still would like to know why.
Why would NASA fake photos ???

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: DrWily

Show were he discusses a pic from the cupola showing a perfect sphere with space around it. If you can't then how does it apply?

Look buddy... It's not my fault if you don't want to read the article. You have consistently dismissed the idea of optics, lenses, and distortion as irreverent. Yet you continue to ask "why can you see space around the Earth?". And we continue to tell you, over and over, fish eye lenses are the answer.

Tell you what... Go down to Bestbuy or Target and get yourself a GoPro. Take a picture of something. Then compare that picture to what your eyes see. If that doesn't explain how fish eye lens are relevant, I'm not sure what will.

a reply to: TrueBrit

n order for the full face of the Earth to be impossible to photograph with a fish eye lens, it would have to be concave, and the ISS suspended right in the middle of the depression. That, of course, is ludicrous, because were it the case, then there would be no horizon. To stand on the center of the Earth would be like standing in the middle of a skate bowl.

It is impossible with any lens from 400 km. I proved it on page one, but this is what your precious NASA says.

Images of the earth may seem commonplace, but there are actually very few pictures of the entire planet. The problem, Simmon said, is all the NASA earth-observing satellites are in low-earth or geostationary orbit, meaning none of them are far enough away to see a full hemisphere. The most familiar pictures of the entire Earth are from the 1960s and 1970s Apollo missions to the moon.

Give it up.

a reply to: WaxingGibbons

What altitude would you calculate they'd have to be to get a full "globe" picture?

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: elephantstone
NASA themselves say it is not possible because you are not high enough.

Until you quote this, you're probably misunderstanding it.

You also misunderstand the image was never meant to be TAKEN as a 'full image of Earth'. It has wideangle lenses on the edges that ROUND THE IMAGE. The most distortion is most likely massive missing area from the cross sections of the lenses in the middle. You think they're 'purposefully' denying this image is distorted by the CLEARLY VISIBLE LENSES that ARE MEANT TO DISTORT LIGHT? To claim they are hiding anything at this point is absurd, but your claim this is essentially photoshop is laughable. Why wouldn't they just photoshop a full picture of Earth out a single window that doesn't already show them bending angles to get the image? Seriously....

Only an idiot would think NASA claimed this is a full picture of the earth that is not using composite lenses to blend seven super wide angle views into a single image.

You would think your brain from the start would understand this is why the Capula is not a bunch of flat windows, and is bending like a dome.

a reply to: WaxingGibbons

I will most certainly not give it up.

I would not want to join you in your staggering ignorance of photography, leave alone the basic physics pertaining to the same.

Good day sir.

a reply to: DrWily

I read the article, this is why I know he didn't discuss or explain the issue with these pics. Give it up.

a reply to: TrueBrit

So you are now arguing against NASA's claim that lower Earth orbit is not high enough to see the entire Earth. Ahaha.

originally posted by: WaxingGibbons
a reply to: TrueBrit

n order for the full face of the Earth to be impossible to photograph with a fish eye lens, it would have to be concave, and the ISS suspended right in the middle of the depression. That, of course, is ludicrous, because were it the case, then there would be no horizon. To stand on the center of the Earth would be like standing in the middle of a skate bowl.

It is impossible with any lens from 400 km. I proved it on page one, but this is what your precious NASA says.

Images of the earth may seem commonplace, but there are actually very few pictures of the entire planet. The problem, Simmon said, is all the NASA earth-observing satellites are in low-earth or geostationary orbit, meaning none of them are far enough away to see a full hemisphere. The most familiar pictures of the entire Earth are from the 1960s and 1970s Apollo missions to the moon.

Give it up.

SINGLE LENSE.

WITH-ANY-SINGLE-LENSE.

THERE ARE 7 ANGLED LENSES.

Im out guys.

/hopeless

a reply to: MacK80

Until you quote this, you're probably misunderstanding it.

It is in my OP for god sakes, I posted it three times in this thread already.....

The last time anyone took a photograph from above low Earth orbit that showed an entire hemisphere (one side of a globe) was in 1972 during Apollo 17. NASA’s Earth Observing System (EOS) satellites were designed to give a check-up of Earth’s health. By 2002, we finally had enough data to make a snap shot of the entire Earth. So we did. The hard part was creating a flat map of the Earth’s surface with four months’ of satellite data. Reto Stockli, now at the Swiss Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology, did much of this work. Then we wrapped the flat map around a ball. My part was integrating the surface, clouds, and oceans to match people’s expectations of how Earth looks from space. That ball became the famous Blue Marble.

Images of the earth may seem commonplace, but there are actually very few pictures of the entire planet. The problem, Simmon said, is all the NASA earth-observing satellites are in low-earth or geostationary orbit, meaning none of them are far enough away to see a full hemisphere. The most familiar pictures of the entire Earth are from the 1960s and 1970s Apollo missions to the moon.

And simple visual proof,

a reply to: DrWily
both waxing gibbous and DrWily show 24/3/2017 registration. somethings up here, i thought registration rules prevented this sort of thing. time for the moderators to do a bit of explaining. Or maybe they are in on it... in any event, this really reduces my desire to visit ATS

originally posted by: DrWily
a reply to: WaxingGibbons

It's not fake... This picture comes directly from NASA:

www.nasa.gov...

Like I said before, by looking out the side windows (which are angled differently than the central window), it's possible to see the edges of the Earth. With a fish eye lens, you can capture light from all 7 windows, producing a distorted image that APPEARS to be a full view of the Earth. It's actually capturing light coming from 7 different directions.

Its also obvious too, the space station structure itself doesn't wrap around the cupola window either, but is visibly warped in the image to appear like it does.

Not wrapped, warped.

a reply to: WaxingGibbons

I'm not, imagine a football 2cms from the peep hole, you would see a white circle ,and surrounding that some of the corridor , now imagine the ball is earth and the peep hole is the ISS ?

a reply to: darkstar57

Really? Now you want to investigate the poster ? Creepy.

He has a legit question and gone to some trouble of making his case.

No matter what the outcome is. Some people might find this interesting or learn something.

Others will never learn.

a reply to: MacK80

Wow, people are obtuse, it is simply not possible from that altitude because you are not high enough, the Earth is too big and no lense allows you to look past the horizon.

It's simple as that. If you cannot grasp this even with the visual aid I posted, you have problems.

a reply to: WaxingGibbons

Your quote was no where near as much proof as you needed.

I'm going with my original theory. You misunderstand it. At no point does it strictly say anything you've said about it being "Impossible to photograph the Earth from LEO."

To further make matters worse, the part that says:

"The last time anyone took a photograph from above low Earth orbit that showed an entire hemisphere (one side of a globe) was in 1972 "

should be clear enough to you, your opinion is flawed.

a reply to: darkstar57

What? So I am actually arguing with myself from two completely opposite standpoints? As if there isn't enough opposition already.

Seriously, the stuff that people come up with when their worldviews are challenged......