SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: robnhood who wrote (50976)12/23/2000 8:25:00 PM
From: James F. Hopkins  Read Replies (1) of 436258
 
Thanx Rrman ! I know they had to stitch photos together, but I don't know at what aspect ( angle ) they were taken from.

Lights directly under them would be brighter; then the
more atmosphere the light has to pass thru the less will
record on the film , if their orbit was about
at the equator then lights far to the north & south would
would appear relatively dimmer.
A wide angle shot from space could not give a true
picture.
-----------------

You should see the stars on a clear dry night from the
top of a mountain, it's a real mind blower..
Over 1000 times as many stars can be seen with the naked
eye from some spots I'v been at, and the bright ones
the normal person sees are brilliant.

Any wide angle photo taken from space is going to have
a natural distortion due to the atmosphere, not only
will the ones towards the edges be dimmer but their
true aspect gets bent by refraction.

Out on the Boat using a sextant there is a large refraction
error I have to put in the calculations for bodies
that are close to the horizon because of the bending
of the light.

When you see the early part of a sun rise , or last of
the sun set, the sun is really below
the horizon and your actually seeing bent light.

It's good you pointed out that Toronto was not as bright
in the picture as it should have been ( would have been
had the shuttle been over head ) . While I understand
( atmosphere filtering and refraction ) I didn't
think to account for it in the photo.
In fact what you pointed out makes me think it's
likely not enhanced at all..as natural distortion
seems to be culprit.
Jim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News