Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(io9)   Not news: Picture of the moon. Fark: Taken from the International Space Station   (space.io9.com ) divider line
    More: Cool, International Space Station, moons, Douglas Wheelock  
•       •       •

7450 clicks; posted to Geek » on 23 May 2014 at 12:17 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



29 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-05-22 08:36:18 PM  
That's no m-

Wait... yes it is.
 
2014-05-22 08:53:33 PM  
Seriously? That's the best picture they could take? I was hoping that they'd be able to get a shot of the moon rover from that distance.
 
2014-05-22 09:49:20 PM  
Why are we just now getting a shot like this!?
 
2014-05-22 10:15:20 PM  
Nice for a desktop background.
 
2014-05-22 11:18:34 PM  

Lando Lincoln: Seriously? That's the best picture they could take? I was hoping that they'd be able to get a shot of the moon rover from that distance.


The ISS is ridiculously close to Earth compared to the moon, as illustrated here (linked because it's huge).

It's actually sort of sad when you think about it, of the things we've put into space, nearly all of them are barely in space.
 
2014-05-23 12:35:20 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Lando Lincoln: Seriously? That's the best picture they could take? I was hoping that they'd be able to get a shot of the moon rover from that distance.

The ISS is ridiculously close to Earth compared to the moon, as illustrated here (linked because it's huge).

It's actually sort of sad when you think about it, of the things we've put into space, nearly all of them are barely in space.


Still, 350 miles closer to the moon than you or I, and I've got better photos.
 
2014-05-23 12:46:34 AM  

RoxtarRyan: That's no m-

Wait... yes it is.


Done in one.
 
2014-05-23 12:56:05 AM  

Lando Lincoln: Seriously? That's the best picture they could take? I was hoping that they'd be able to get a shot of the moon rover from that distance.


It's a great pic... We have plenty of up close pictures, they're getting boring...

Besides, they are still around 250000 miles away(moon is that far from Earth, roughly, and they aren't THAT high above the Earth), it's not like the ISS is orbiting the moon. What do you suggest that they use to take this picture? Hubble? That's like looking at your junk with binoculars. I would also guess that most of the devices on the ISS they might use are more focused on wavelengths that we can't see or similar stuff.

In other words, it's a dude with a camera. And free time as well as room to love about (As opposed to the moon missions which were very work intensive with little free time).

I agree with the other poster that something like this could have happened a lot earlier...
 
2014-05-23 01:56:51 AM  
I DID kind of expect it to be all bright and big and round and, well, bright.

Maybe not as big as the image in that old New Yorker cartoon, but still kinda big.
 
2014-05-23 02:03:53 AM  
So instead of a picture of something 238,855 miles away, it's a picture of something 238,625 miles away.

Invigorating.
 
2014-05-23 03:14:52 AM  
As someone who has looked at his junk with binoculars I must say that I was expecting the moon to look more impressive than that.
 
2014-05-23 03:28:26 AM  

ABQGOD: TuteTibiImperes: Lando Lincoln: Seriously? That's the best picture they could take? I was hoping that they'd be able to get a shot of the moon rover from that distance.

The ISS is ridiculously close to Earth compared to the moon, as illustrated here (linked because it's huge).

It's actually sort of sad when you think about it, of the things we've put into space, nearly all of them are barely in space.

Still, 350 miles closer to the moon than you or I, and I've got better photos.


Actually, that was shot across the atmosphere, so when the moon is over your head it's a few thousand miles closer than that shot.
 
2014-05-23 03:29:39 AM  

RoxtarRyan: That's no m-

Wait... yes it is.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-05-23 03:44:29 AM  

red5ish: As someone who has looked at his junk with binoculars I must say that I was expecting the moon to look more impressive than that.


Wha?
 
2014-05-23 05:10:33 AM  

Old Man Winter: red5ish: As someone who has looked at his junk with binoculars I must say that I was expecting the moon to look more impressive than that.

Wha?


All those boils,scabs and buboes do look impressive through binoculars.
 
2014-05-23 06:36:12 AM  
Are you sure??

img.fark.net
 
2014-05-23 07:09:57 AM  

question_dj: Why are we just now getting a shot like this!?


From another website, this picture was taken in 2010.
 
2014-05-23 07:52:39 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Lando Lincoln: Seriously? That's the best picture they could take? I was hoping that they'd be able to get a shot of the moon rover from that distance.

The ISS is ridiculously close to Earth compared to the moon, as illustrated here (linked because it's huge).

It's actually sort of sad when you think about it, of the things we've put into space, nearly all of them are barely in space.


Hmm, numbers on this are a bit off.  ISS orbit is about 100km higher than it states, and Hubble about 30km lower, and Sputniks periapsis was 215km, but it's apoapsis was about 940km.

Of course, small differences given the scale.
 
2014-05-23 07:53:20 AM  

ABQGOD: Still, 350 miles closer to the moon than you or I, and I've got better photos.


Er, not really. Judging by the angle, vaguely 70% of the Earth's surface was closer to the Moon at that moment, and if you happened to be night-side where the Moon was high in the sky, you were not only thousands of miles closer outright (in a darker environment), you also had thousands of miles less atmosphere to look through as well.
 
2014-05-23 08:46:27 AM  
Isn't the science already settled that the moon was a hoax?
 
2014-05-23 09:00:59 AM  
img.fark.net

Uh oh...
 
2014-05-23 09:03:27 AM  
I'm not a photo-ographer so I don't know... why don't stars appear in the pictures? Last time I looked up, space was chock full of stars. Ya'll think this picture was taken from a set stage in New Mexico?
 
2014-05-23 09:05:06 AM  
media.tumblr.com
 
2014-05-23 09:19:35 AM  

Demetrius: Nice for a desktop background.


Yep.
 
2014-05-23 11:23:51 AM  

MJMaloney187: I'm not a photo-ographer so I don't know... why don't stars appear in the pictures? Last time I looked up, space was chock full of stars. Ya'll think this picture was taken from a set stage in New Mexico?


Ever try taking pictures of stars during the daytime? Doesn't work because the Sun wipes out the small amount of light from those distant stars.

Now in orbit, you still have to deal with the Sun and you also have to deal with the fact that the Earth is itself reflecting quite a bit of sunlight as well. If the photographer was shooting directly away from those light sources, you'd see stars. But given that he was photographing right at Earth, you're going to have tons of light pollution that wipes out other much more delicate sources of light.
 
2014-05-23 01:36:52 PM  
The Moon is hollow inside. the craters have hidden access openings where the Space People stop for gas and refreshments/bathroom, etc.

like Shell gas station only better.  (;
 
2014-05-23 02:28:55 PM  
Picture of the moon. How did it get there?
 
2014-05-23 03:23:12 PM  

Chalji: MJMaloney187: I'm not a photo-ographer so I don't know... why don't stars appear in the pictures? Last time I looked up, space was chock full of stars. Ya'll think this picture was taken from a set stage in New Mexico?

Ever try taking pictures of stars during the daytime? Doesn't work because the Sun wipes out the small amount of light from those distant stars.

Now in orbit, you still have to deal with the Sun and you also have to deal with the fact that the Earth is itself reflecting quite a bit of sunlight as well. If the photographer was shooting directly away from those light sources, you'd see stars. But given that he was photographing right at Earth, you're going to have tons of light pollution that wipes out other much more delicate sources of light.


In some ways, you are correct. The problem is that a camera can only capture a limited range of brightness. The moon is actually very bright compared to the stars. If the camera properly exposes the moon, it doesn't have enough sensitivity to see the stars, too. As a counter example, look at those time lapse videos of the stars and notice that when the moon appears, it shines bright like the sun.
 
2014-05-23 05:04:17 PM  

Honest Bender: Uh oh...


I'm only following the story at this point for closure.

/seriously though, it's a shame the villain decided to go all Final Fantasy and be like "war is terrible so I'm gonna make it so no one ever suffers again"
//seems to be a running trend in Japanese games/literature
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report