cool shot
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: James Nagler on 22 May 2010 20:34 On Sat, 22 May 2010 21:36:05 +0100, "Ivan I" <ivan(a)uptheresomewhere.maybe> wrote: >"James Nagler" <jnagler(a)spamproofed.net> wrote in message >news:lcfgv5h9d73m2c4nm0kr8hr5qqcljn71bo(a)4ax.com... >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 20:56:54 +0100, "Ivan I" <ivan(a)uptheresomewhere.maybe> >> wrote: >> >>>"M-M" <nospam.m-m(a)ny.more> wrote in message >>>news:nospam.m-m-83AF4A.16485821052010(a)cpe-76-190-186-198.neo.res.rr.com... >>>> In article >>>> <5d52ce50-5e07-416f-8b26-e8f24fc0286e(a)j27g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, >>>> Val Hallah <michaelnewport(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1279952/Nasa-shuttle-Atlantis-s >>>>> pace-station-seen-passing-Sun.html >>>> >>>> >>>> It is a great shot, but not quite as difficult as it appears. >>>> >>>> There are databases that will tell you exactly when the satellites will >>>> pass in front of the sun or moon from your latitude and longitude. >>> >>> >>>I would tend to disagree, I think it's an extremely difficult shot. >>> >>>However, the published photo doesn't make sense. In the published photo, >>>they are still both travelling in the wrong direction. >>> >>>Initially, I thought that maybe he had the camera in portrait mode, but it >>>still doesn't make sense. There are only two directions the ISS could >>>have >>>been travelling in the photo. Heading approx. 7 o'clock, or heading >>>approx. >>>10 o'clock. >>> >>>So, the only explanation I can think of is that he deliberately tilted the >>>camera in order to try and achieve the perfect media shot, but then the >>>image was rotated afterwards. >>> >>> >>> >> >> I strongly suspect that not one of you have ever been near a telescope + >> camera before. > > >Even mirrored, it still doesn't make sense. > Play with optics mounted on an equatorial mount sometime. Even if only using a simple alt-azimuth mount then the time of day will also make a difference. A 90 degree orientation change from zenith to horizon, or 180 degrees orientation change from horizon to horizon. Since he wasn't needing long exposures then he might have used either, equatorial or alt-azimuth. With a tracking alt-azimuth mount then you need a field-rotator to properly track a subject for long exposures.
From: M-M on 23 May 2010 08:02 In article <lcfgv5h9d73m2c4nm0kr8hr5qqcljn71bo(a)4ax.com>, James Nagler <jnagler(a)spamproofed.net> wrote: > I strongly suspect that not one of you have ever been near a telescope + > camera before. You suspect wrong. I do all the time. It is an easy shot with the right equipment since you know exactly when the event will happen and your camera is electronically tracking the sun. -- m-m http://www.mhmyers.com
From: DanP on 23 May 2010 09:15 On May 22, 8:56 pm, "Ivan I" <i...(a)uptheresomewhere.maybe> wrote: > "M-M" <nospam....(a)ny.more> wrote in message > > news:nospam.m-m-83AF4A.16485821052010(a)cpe-76-190-186-198.neo.res.rr.com.... > > > In article > > <5d52ce50-5e07-416f-8b26-e8f24fc02...(a)j27g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, > > Val Hallah <michaelnewp...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1279952/Nasa-shuttle-A.... > >> pace-station-seen-passing-Sun.html > > > It is a great shot, but not quite as difficult as it appears. > > > There are databases that will tell you exactly when the satellites will > > pass in front of the sun or moon from your latitude and longitude. > > I would tend to disagree, I think it's an extremely difficult shot. > > However, the published photo doesn't make sense. In the published photo, > they are still both travelling in the wrong direction. > > Initially, I thought that maybe he had the camera in portrait mode, but it > still doesn't make sense. There are only two directions the ISS could have > been travelling in the photo. Heading approx. 7 o'clock, or heading approx. > 10 o'clock. > > So, the only explanation I can think of is that he deliberately tilted the > camera in order to try and achieve the perfect media shot, but then the > image was rotated afterwards. "The Shuttle was in the process of performing a back flip so that astronauts on board the orbiter could study the heat shield for any damage caused during the launch." I do not know which way is the front for the ISS. DanP
From: Jeff R. on 23 May 2010 09:17 "M-M" <nospam.m-m(a)ny.more> wrote in message news:nospam.m-m-1426E0.08024223052010(a)cpe-76-190-186-198.neo.res.rr.com... > In article <lcfgv5h9d73m2c4nm0kr8hr5qqcljn71bo(a)4ax.com>, > James Nagler <jnagler(a)spamproofed.net> wrote: > >> I strongly suspect that not one of you have ever been near a telescope + >> camera before. > > > You suspect wrong. I do all the time. > > It is an easy shot with the right equipment since you know exactly when > the event will happen and your camera is electronically tracking the sun. Uh huh. Especially when the transit takes about... oh, I'd guess... half a second? Piece of cake. -- Jeff R (an easy shot)
From: DanP on 23 May 2010 09:17
On May 22, 10:10 pm, "Ivan I" <i...(a)uptheresomewhere.maybe> wrote: > "Ivan I" <i...(a)uptheresomewhere.maybe> wrote in message > > news:DcCdnZma88zG3WXWnZ2dnUVZ7tadnZ2d(a)pipex.net... > > > > > > > "James Nagler" <jnag...(a)spamproofed.net> wrote in message > >news:lcfgv5h9d73m2c4nm0kr8hr5qqcljn71bo(a)4ax.com... > >> On Sat, 22 May 2010 20:56:54 +0100, "Ivan I" > >> <i...(a)uptheresomewhere.maybe> > >> wrote: > > >>>"M-M" <nospam....(a)ny.more> wrote in message > >>>news:nospam.m-m-83AF4A.16485821052010(a)cpe-76-190-186-198.neo.res.rr.com... > >>>> In article > >>>> <5d52ce50-5e07-416f-8b26-e8f24fc02...(a)j27g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>, > >>>> Val Hallah <michaelnewp...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>>>>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1279952/Nasa-shuttle-A... > >>>>> pace-station-seen-passing-Sun.html > > >>>> It is a great shot, but not quite as difficult as it appears. > > >>>> There are databases that will tell you exactly when the satellites will > >>>> pass in front of the sun or moon from your latitude and longitude. > > >>>I would tend to disagree, I think it's an extremely difficult shot. > > >>>However, the published photo doesn't make sense. In the published photo, > >>>they are still both travelling in the wrong direction. > > >>>Initially, I thought that maybe he had the camera in portrait mode, but > >>>it > >>>still doesn't make sense. There are only two directions the ISS could > >>>have > >>>been travelling in the photo. Heading approx. 7 o'clock, or heading > >>>approx. > >>>10 o'clock. > > >>>So, the only explanation I can think of is that he deliberately tilted > >>>the > >>>camera in order to try and achieve the perfect media shot, but then the > >>>image was rotated afterwards. > > >> I strongly suspect that not one of you have ever been near a telescope + > >> camera before. > > > Even mirrored, it still doesn't make sense. > > No two ways about it, it's fake. Just like the moon landings? DanP |