What is Digg?27 Comments
- Darrelc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Because the light from the stars isn't bright enough to have an impact on the film. try it outside, try taking a picture of the stars, see what it comes out like.
- ArchieAndrews, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Relative illumination. Film is light sensitive and the film is exposed to light for exactly as long as is required to correctly show the subject (the earth in this image). Compared to the brightness of the reflected light of the earth, the stars and other space items are too dim to register. The shutter was only open long enough to let the earth be properly exposed. If they wanted to show the stars "around" it, they would have to over-expose the subject and the Earth would have been washed out in the process.
edit: damn, too long winded to notice the question was answered above me in the time it took me to write this. - giantnegro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I work with rockets and it's really a shame that we don't get to put cameras on all of them (It just costs too damn much). Here's a video from a recent launch out of Wallops Island, VA. I've edited it up so that all you see is the motor ignitions, boom deployment, and re-entry.
http://www.utdallas.edu/~roddy/Links/yakety_hickman_short2.wmv - keldawgyo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+865 miles up, and slamming into the ground at 500 ft/s. damn.
- danglerman, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Direct Link to Image
http://www.airspacemag.com/issues/2006/october-november/images/pop/1stPhotoFromSpace.jpg
Bara:
Just to refresh your memory, this was taken in 1946. - wbreim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I love space, with I could be a space bounty hunter.
- brstilson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The exposure setting was low in order not to over-expose earth, which is a lot brighter to the camera than stars.
Besides, if it were fake as you imply, how hard would it be to fake some stars? Just prick some holes in a black tarp. - randatola, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm dizzy.
- DreKor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You've come a long way from some confiscated V2s. Well done.
- Manguskahn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Perfect retro or NASA employee PC wallpaper! I need to show that pic to my grandfather. He is an optical physicist at NASA and he helped design the corrective lens fitted on the Hubble Space Telescope.
- lazydrumhead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2the shot was taken with a fast shutter speed which only allows the brightest light available to come into the shot -- here being the earth reflecting the sun's light.
kind of like night-blindedness of a camera. - mcottier, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3w00t - useless comment!
- Xtant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i think i can see my house in that pic.
I grew up just east of white sands and used to get really annoyed when they would stop highway traffic for an hour so they could launch a missile. good to finally see some results. - cekim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Where are the "OMG THIS IS SO OLD" people? The picture was taken in 1946..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hats off to the true first man-made objects in space: The V2s! In your face, Sputnik (and all those trivia games that parrot the lie).
- msprout, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Does anybody have this photo in wallpaper resolutions? This is perfect for widescreen monitors!
- idonthack, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Now playing:
Yoko Kanno - Tank! - timmay, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2haha i get it but i dout many people will understand that bro
- opnickc, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5That's because you're an idiot.
The sun is very bright and very close. The Earth/moon reflect a whole lot of this light. Other stars give off a lot of light, but due to their distance are very faint.
In order to see the stars in these shots, you'd have to overexpose the image, meaning the earth would just be a big, white blur.
Oh, and I only called you an idiot because of all the people who use this as "evidence" that the moon landing was faked. Just because you're ignorant doesn't mean NASA is hiding something. - ZeroMP, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2It was a joke, and you meant "to" and not "too".
- keldawgyo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1too what?
- pistboy, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0 There's no stars! It has to be fake. This was just a warm up for a "moon landing". Hollywood strikes again.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -12/+3Lies, all lies. Man has never set foot on space.
- mancat, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1Umm. Look at the quality of the images.
- ZeroMP, on 10/12/2007, -17/+2w00t - First Post!
- Bara, on 10/12/2007, -37/+1I still don't understand why all of these space pictures don't have ANY stars or galaxies or the billions of other things in space viewable...
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 