Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

is this pic possible

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
E_T

posted on Aug, 4 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
and the optics on the scopes are cheap and degrade quickly (coatins on them are sub standard and scratch way too easily).

Actually I wouldn't be surpprised if they use plastic lens and those kind of POS.

Here's little about telescope basics.
www.starizona.com...
www.geocities.com...
science.howstuffworks.com...




posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 08:45 AM
link   



How about that DO you think this pic is posible? ( I know answer)


E_T

posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by pushkin
How about that DO you think this pic is posible? ( I know answer)

Very nice pic... and let's not spoil other's fun.



posted on Aug, 5 2004 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Anelemas are cool!



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Cool pic, and yes, it's very possible, but it can't be done in one shot. Thats several pictures of the sun taken at the same time each day throughout 1 year. It shows the relative position of the sun in the sky as the earth rotates around it and "tilts"

By the way, it's analemas not anelemas


[edit on 6-8-2004 by sensfan]



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 02:48 PM
link   
it's fake,the planet is far too big compared to the moon



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkSide
it's fake,the planet is far too big compared to the moon


You are so smart!!!

I wana be like you!!!!!!

right....

I.

[edit on 6-8-2004 by ivan]



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 03:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by sensfan
Cool pic, and yes, it's very possible, but it can't be done in one shot. Thats several pictures of the sun taken at the same time each day throughout 1 year. It shows the relative position of the sun in the sky as the earth rotates around it and "tilts"

By the way, it's analemas not anelemas


[edit on 6-8-2004 by sensfan]


You totally right



posted on Aug, 6 2004 @ 04:45 PM
link   
I don't know about the size, but it does seem Jupiter and Saturn are both way too bright in relation to the moon. the caption in first picture even admits the image fake!! Given the relative brightnesses are the same in all the other images.... it stands to reason these are probably fake too.



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 01:07 AM
link   
the esteemed muppet has replied on one of my threads? ladies and gentleman, we have been touched ATS greatness



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by muppet
I don't know about the size, but it does seem Jupiter and Saturn are both way too bright in relation to the moon. the caption in first picture even admits the image fake!! Given the relative brightnesses are the same in all the other images.... it stands to reason these are probably fake too.


muppet, have you actually EVER EVER look in to something on the sky via telescope?

With 150 USA telescope you can actually see moon's going around the Jupiter. I saw them many times.


I.


[edit on 7-8-2004 by ivan]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 06:48 AM
link   
Yes Ivan, I have. And I've seen the moons of jupiter too.

The question is not whether one can see jupiter. Of course you can see jupiter.

The question is whether the moon and jupiter are similar brightnesses, and whether they can be photographed together like that. Read the caption on the first image. You are totally missing the point of my posts.

LOL @ sublime


E_T

posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Actually Jupiter and Saturnus look dazzling bright looked trough telescope when eyes are properly adapted.




Vixen 900/100 mm Refractor, Nikon Coolpix 950, held by hand behind the eyepiece! Exposure time 1/2 sec.
Well, that's "comfortable" way to take pics.


www.spaceweather.com... (there's also e-mail address of Doug Murray)

[edit on 7-8-2004 by E_T]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Look at this series of images, from the same site. Notice how the moon is overexposed?


This is what photographer had to say.

P.C. Sherrod: "We used our public viewing scope, an 8" Meade LX 90 telescope and Olympus digital C-3000 camera with 1/40th second exposures. Saturn's image is suffering from turbulence since it was only 16 degrees from the horizon when taken. The brighter moon is badly 'burned in' from overexposure. Lots of fun, and quickly over!"



Or this one. showing again how the moon would really look like when photographed with saturn. Again, hugely overexposed.



And finally this image.


it was taken at the same time as the image originally posted from the Anomalies website. It looks almost exactly the same, and the photographer says this.


Photo details: 3 1/2" Questar telescope and an Olympus 3040 digital camera. "Because the Full Moon is 10 times brighter than Saturn, I shot the Moon... then shot Saturn at a different exposure," says Sandy. "The images were then combined to form the final image.


So if the photographers themselves admit the photographs are composites, why the insistence they are not?



[edit on 7-8-2004 by muppet]



posted on Aug, 7 2004 @ 10:42 AM
link   
Why is this thread still being argued?

Who cares. Yes the Pic is "possible" as it shows a real event. Yes the pic is a composite of two identical images taken at separate exposires to compensate for the limits of the technology. What is the big deal?





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join