If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Discover) Cool Moonse   (blogs.discovermagazine.com) divider line 21
More: Cool, ice crystals, giant planets, Thank You So Much, hexagons, crouch, ISO, radius, meteors  
•       •       •

5290 clicks; posted to Geek » on 07 Nov 2011 at 2:17 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



21 Comments   (+0 »)
   
 
ArkAngel [TotalFark]
2011-11-07 01:42:27 PM
M-O-O-N. That spells a møønse once bit my sister
 
Because People in power are Stupid [TotalFark]
2011-11-07 02:15:54 PM
That's Amore'
 
PerfectStorm
2011-11-07 02:28:08 PM
Brighter than the sun, it is.
 
red5ish
2011-11-07 02:28:36 PM
Fog. How does it work?
 
HallsOfMandos
2011-11-07 02:36:35 PM
red5ish: Fog. How does it work?

Reading the article, how does it work?
 
madgonad
2011-11-07 02:39:11 PM
f/2.8?!?!?

What kind of idiot shoots the stars wide open? Well, I guess the kind that gets that mushy, grainy mess.

This is how you shoot the night sky. Perspective always helps
apod.nasa.gov
/hot like deep space isn't
 
kahn
2011-11-07 02:53:40 PM
.cx?
 
Alex Sanders
2011-11-07 03:19:24 PM
kahn: .cx?

That's what I was expecting.
 
H31N0US
2011-11-07 04:13:22 PM
Where I grew up a moon like that meant you had better have some plywood on your east facing windows
 
Iamanevilcarrot
2011-11-07 04:22:26 PM
Moosen!

I saw a flock of them. There were many of them - many much moosen!
 
The Bad Astronomer [TotalFark]
2011-11-07 04:42:41 PM
madgonad: f/2.8?!?!?

What kind of idiot shoots the stars wide open?

The kind that was in a hurry to make sure I got the shot before the ice cloud passed by the Moon. I took several pictures at different exposures with various apertures, but the "grain" (actually shot noise from Poissonian photon statistics) is from the ISO setting, not the aperture. Using a narrower aperture setting wouldn't have helped, since in this case all the objects had a distance of infinity as far as focus goes. Also, given the long 10-second exposure I used, detector noise was minimized anyway. Using a smaller aperture and longer exposure wouldn't have helped that, and might've increased wind blur.

Clearly, in your picture (which is quite nice, BTW), it was more important since you have foreground objects. It's nice to have a wide-angle lens, too, but my off-the-shelf camera is not so sophisticated.
 
jfarkinB
2011-11-07 04:50:51 PM
madgonad: f/2.8?!?!?

What kind of idiot shoots the stars wide open? Well, I guess the kind that gets that mushy, grainy mess.

Y'know, if I look at the picture FTFA, and then look at yours, I see a lot more grain in yours. If I think about it this evening, I'll fire up ImageJ and run some stats on a sample of sky from each -- not that that's terribly robust on saved-for-Web JPEGs.

If you're trying to capture an inherently diffuse atmospheric feature, and you know you're going to be blowing out the brighter objects that contain high-spatial-frequency information, stopping down is really pointless. I guess it would be good for faithfully imaging the dust on your sensor, though.
 
Fano
2011-11-07 05:10:47 PM
CHA
 
PurpleP
2011-11-07 05:29:10 PM
What does it mean!??
 
mdking09
2011-11-07 06:22:57 PM
yawn. Anyone who lives in a northern climate sees this on a regular basis.
 
rwfan
2011-11-07 06:51:48 PM
mdking09: yawn. Anyone who lives in a northern climate sees this on a regular basis.

I saw it tonight, as a matter of fact, as I was shaking an angry fist at the moon.

/why does the moon always seem to be full when I want to catch an astronomical event?
//hope I can show the kids the asteroid tomorrow
///damn moon was pretty full for the supernova too.
 
Millennium
2011-11-07 07:22:34 PM
It would seem that moanse.cx is currently not registered to anyone.

Challenge?
 
balancing act
2011-11-07 08:09:38 PM
H31N0US: Where I grew up a moon like that meant you had better have some plywood on your east facing windows

I always expect snow from a moon like that.
Not any snow in Phoenix after the lovely halo Saturday night, tho.
 
chupathingie
2011-11-07 08:20:33 PM
jfarkinB: madgonad: f/2.8?!?!?

What kind of idiot shoots the stars wide open? Well, I guess the kind that gets that mushy, grainy mess.

Y'know, if I look at the picture FTFA, and then look at yours, I see a lot more grain in yours. If I think about it this evening, I'll fire up ImageJ and run some stats on a sample of sky from each -- not that that's terribly robust on saved-for-Web JPEGs.

If you're trying to capture an inherently diffuse atmospheric feature, and you know you're going to be blowing out the brighter objects that contain high-spatial-frequency information, stopping down is really pointless. I guess it would be good for faithfully imaging the dust on your sensor, though.

Add to the difficulty of measuring the grain the fact that that image is tonemapped.

/there are better ways to combine bracketed exposures...
 
brianbankerus
2011-11-08 03:28:27 AM
madgonad: f/2.8?!?!?

What kind of idiot shoots the stars wide open? Well, I guess the kind that gets that mushy, grainy mess.

This is how you shoot the night sky. Perspective always helps
[apod.nasa.gov image 640x950]
/hot like deep space isn't

Woah... that was some gorgeous shiznit right there. Thanks for posting that one!
 
red5ish
2011-11-08 11:37:54 AM
HallsOfMandos: red5ish: Fog. How does it work?

Reading the article, how does it work?

I live on the foggy coast of California and see this halo effect all the time.
 
Displayed 21 of 21 comments

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
 


Link here