What is Digg?Sponsored by Microsoft
Microsoft responds to the headlines. view!
microsoft.com/everybodysbusiness - Read our developers’ points of view on the headlines making news.
84 Comments
- lazydrumhead, on 10/12/2007, -9/+74Yes, I have several moons at my house.
- masamunecyrus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+35"To do a common thing uncommonly well brings success." -- Henry J. Heinz (Founder of the Heinz corporation, known for their ketchup)
I'd say that quote fits this image. - Saintlink, on 10/12/2007, -3/+33Yea, the detail level is amazing for an 8.2 megapixel camera. Combine that with the colors and fairly sharp focus and we all have a new desktop background. :)
- agdrago, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28It is very inspiring to see such an unusual image of a very common object.
- chkltcow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+24Here's what I get with a 300D and a crappy 5.1" Orion reflector with a 2x barlow....
http://www.baneverything.org/pictures/moon3.jpg - ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -3/+26Wow...that's even better than the crap that NASA puts out.
I'm using that for my wallpaper. - chkltcow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22@beelz: Full moon sucks for photography. Light straight on = no shadows = no details. You wouldn't get half as many craters on a full moon as you do a crescent or half moon.
- beelz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+211920 x 1200
http://www.dslreports.com/speak/slideshow/16835051?c=1058688&ret=L2ZvcnVtL3JlbWFyaywxNjgyMjY4MX5kYXlzPTk5OTl%2Bc3RhcnQ9NjA%3D&dsz=o
1680x1050
http://www.dslreports.com/speak/slideshow/16822836?c=1057582&ret=L2ZvcnVtL3JlbWFyaywxNjgyMjY4MQ%3D%3D&dsz=o - FlapJaw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17Thanks everyone.
Sorry, I should have posted exposure details before...
This image is a mosaic of 15 separate and slightly overlapping 8.2 megapixel images from my Canon EOS-20D (unmodified), taken in Raw mode and converted and stitched together in Photoshop CS2. As you can see from the EXIF data, the exposures were each 1/5 second at ISO 100.
Though the moon is generally made of gray, dusty material it is very bright, photographically, since it is bathed in sunlight.
I mounted my 20D to my Meade LX200 GPS UHTC 10" Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope via my 2x Televue Powermate (a focal length doubler, similar to a teleconverter, which also serves to mate my camera to the 2" telescope eyepiece tube). Effective focal length was 5000mm f/20.
Looking through the viewfinder I swept across the surface in a zig-zag fashion, trying for about 1/3 overlap between frames. I triggered the shutter with my TC80-N3 remote timer/controller. I did the stitching by hand in Photoshop.
Since it is tremendously downsized from the original mosaic, which was almost 40 megapixels, and was taken at the camera's most noise-free setting (ISO 100), the data is very accurate, and thus I was able to strongly increase the saturation via Photoshop's Image - Adjust - Hue/Saturation function.
-Noel - da5idblacksun, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20That is truly awesome.
- mozzer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18Great pic, the surface actually looks habitable.
- mozzer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10@chkltcow
Dont be so hard on yourself. That's still a gorgeous pic! - chkltcow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Oh, I wasn't meaning to be hard on myself. I'm actually rather fond of that shot.
My point was, with a 350D you can EASILY pull off nice shots like that. My telescope cost me $250 a year or so ago... the T-ring, barlow, and scope adapter were about another $100. Effectively, it's 1800mm @ f/6.9, then I resized it down a bit to take out a bit of the fuzziness that my eyes couldn't detect in the viewfinder. Focusing like that is HARD!
Even with a standard cheapo 70-300mm lens that most people get with their SLRs, you can take some nice pics. I'd try about 0.3s @ 300mm f/11and adjust from there. The one trick is that you CANNOT let your camera adjust for you if you expect any detail. It will overexpose the crap out of it. When you're shooting through a scope at the moon, it's very VERY bright.
Just get out there and experiment with it, man. You can read all day, but you'll only learn by doing and seeing what works well for you. - Cymrubeats, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I mounted my 20D to my Meade LX200 GPS UHTC 10" Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope via my 2x Televue Powermate (a focal length doubler, similar to a teleconverter, which also serves to mate my camera to the 2" telescope eyepiece tube). Effective focal length was 5000mm f/20.
Well...you wouldn't really have to 'modify' the camera then would you. - nickerbocker, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13I'm just glad it wasn't a picture of someone's bare ass.
- raceman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6WHERE IS THE FLAG!
- andyperfect, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5He's also got a gallery of additional images, all just as incredible as this moon pic, and all diesktop worthy. =D
http://www.dslreports.com/pics/dimaging/868867 - swordedge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Asteroid my left foot. Earth was hit by something the size of mars at an angle near 30 degrees, as I recall. This resulted in the current earth moon system. There is no telling what Earth was like before this event
- madmax85, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4http://www.meade.com/catalog/lx/8_10_lx200gps.html
The telescope he is using - NikZ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4NASA does indeed acknowledge Noel's fine work:
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap060317.html - seventoes, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Then everyone exploded.
- mikeazorin, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7No, not really. The moon and the earth formed when a huge asteroid hit the mostly unformed earth, creating an asteroid field. Gravity made the larger rocks crash and merge, and after only a few weeks, two spheres were created, one orbiting the other.
- aaryn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I've read somewhere that it isn't completely spherical, it's more of a slight oval shape
- Scipio, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3awesome shot...however, is it just me or the moon does not seem completely spherical in some parts?
- WarMace, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Thanks to the photographers careful SATURATION skills, this photograph shows details of Luna I usually overlook.
- notforsale, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Tell that to the Dinosaurs.
- NikZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And again today! :)
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap060907.html - wurzelgummage, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3saintlink, it's 15 x 8.2 !
- kdehead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2get a load of this image of his, of the cocoon nebula
http://www.dslreports.com/pics/resize/112270?x=1600&y=1024&key=
utterly amazing just how many stars are out there.
very impressive photography! - aeiou, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2There is no "x" no. It isn't a zoom lens, but rather a telescope attached to the camera. Even as such, an "x" no. is useless because that only measures the difference between the widest and the longest settings on a zoom. It is the actuall focal length (measured in mm) that matters.
- kraney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's amazing you can recall anything at your age - and that you survived to tell about it
- resplence, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have no idea. B&W film/low key grayscale digitalizing, perhaps?
- Otto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That moon is like Sputnik! Spherical, but quite pointy in parts.
- macjonesnz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Interesting with all the hi-res photos that there haven't been any taken yet of that little moon-buggy car the Americans left up there? Or did they....?
- Otto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1scottybowl: That article was inaccurate and wild speculation, at best. The VLT is not capable of seeing the moon with such resolution because of its design. The mirrors used in the VLT lose too much of the light for objects that are "cold". It's mainly designed to see in the infrared, and works best with things above 1000 degrees celcius.
- melanko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm guessing the bright lights just right of the moon is most likely Venus and Mars.
Magnificent image. - Handcannons, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1*****
Yea, the detail level is amazing for an 8.2 megapixel camera. Combine that with the colors and fairly sharp focus and we all have a new desktop background. :)
****
A 8.2 mp camera attached to a 10" telescope for an effective 5,000 mm focal length. The photographer took several shots of the moon and stitched them together to get that shot. He said the original was over 40 mp. That doesn't take anything away from the photo though, it's still simply an awesome photo. - Otto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No telescope exists with the incredibly awesome resolution and focus necessary to see details that fine, even that 'close' to home.
Telescopes are generally made for looking at things far, far away. They can't focus on close up things. The moon is far enough away for cheap telescopes to not be able to see details that fine, but close enough that expensive telescopes are not made to see things that close up. - Hormelinator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1nice ... see the stuff direct ... att doesn't have bandwidth limits on hosting do they?
http://ncarboni.home.att.net/Astrophotography.html
"there is no dark side of the Moon really... matter of fact it's all dark" - Hollywood, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Got some photos to share?
- jtsai256, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Keep in mind that the Earth has a much thicker atmosphere than the moon!
- carve, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So cool! I've heard of stitching together photos to form a panorama, but not overlaying images of the same area to increase detail. Does anyone know where I can find a tutorial on how to do this?
- ahawks, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4The description takls about the camera and stitching... but what kind of lens/telescope was used? I have an 8MP Canon 350D, and have been unable to get anywhere near that level of detail on the moon.
Nevermind, he says so in the forum thread. - chkltcow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Man... I wish I had known about that beforehand. The picture I linked above was taken.... you guessed it... Saturday Sept 2. Problem is, it was taken at 10:30pm Eastern Time, and that crash didn't occur until after 1:30pm Eastern Time. By that time, we had another storm rolling in and clouds obscured everything :(
- LudicrousSpeed, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2VERY impressive! What would make this shot even more impressive is if it could have included a shot of the SMART-1 crashing into the moon back on the night of Sept 2. http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/30aug_smart1.htm?list127118
- daurkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All I can think of looking at that photo is
"Thank god we have a moon as our asteroid and meteor catching mitt" Look at how banged up that thing is. - McNash, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Never realized the moon was so full of color, its really an amazing piece of rock this guy is a skilled photographer, I'm definitely going to take a look to try to find his gallery.
- DarkSpartan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've seen few Moon shots that look as nice as this. Looks like I have a new wallpaper... I've got to give props, incredible job.
- TheXeno, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Wow
- adrianguru, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1My new desktop pic, nice job.
-
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 