Of course there are stars!

Originally posted by totallackey
I think the photos were altered, just as the photos were altered from Hubble. The only reason we see the colors we see when we are looking at the nebulae, galaxies, dust clouds, and stars, is because of the Earth's atmosphere. If we were outside of it, we would not see these colors. The colors are painted in before release.

The colours are not painted in. Hubble uses different filters that only allow various wavelengths of light in like, infrared and ultraviolet and various colours in between.



When combined into a single image, it forms a false colour image. If you take an image in just red, green and blue and combine them, it forms a true colour image.

You should take a read through this site, if you haven't already: link

Nikon D2Xs with a 10.5mm fisheye lens at f/11, 1/500, and ISO 200.

That's amazing. My Nikon just refuses to take a picture if I point it at a high Sun without a filter, and I have read of the D2X (almost identical to the s model) being ruined by accidentally being pointed at the Sun. Here is what you need for a decent shot of the Sun, but there are no ND filters aboard the ISS. And if you think that image you posted is a raw image, you're kidding yourself. Even the Apollo lunar images went through a lot of processing to get them to look right. The D2X has a pretty lousy UV response due to blocking coatings, but I still think it would be damaged by direct exposure, no atmospheric protection at all.

ISO 50 | f/13 | 1/8000sec | 10 stop ND filter (that makes f/23)



@wmd_2008

Photographic Lighting

YOUR lack of knowledge is astounding!

Diffuse lighting gives soft shadows, that's what I was saying, isn't it? Obviously the astronaut image with the Sun behind him/her had extra lighting, that distinct shadow on her left arm can not possibly be from the Sun, pretty simple image forensics. Also if you zoom in to the visor reflection, you see a shadow of the camera lens that is obviously being side lit, as the camera is pointing pretty well into the Sun.
There has never been an ND filter taken on any mission, even though the Sun is the dominant item for the time they are in space, and that is why you will never see an image of how the Sun, or sunspots really looks in space. If they ever took an ND filter with them (and I have offered to pay for one) they'd have to show us the results. Simple answer, don't take one.

@Soylent Green Is People

Why are the photons from artificial light so special that it could illuminate objects in space, but the photons from the Sun can't?

Ah, the problem is that you still believe in photons!
The Fundamental Nature Of Light
www.science20.com...

@totallackey

Can someone explain why we would see color in any photo taken from the moon? If there is no atmosphere, then how is it possible to take color pictures? Also, any photos taken from the ISS would be beyond the boundaries of atmospheric refraction for color to be possible, would it not?

Good question, the answer though is not so simple. The Moon does have a thin atmosphere, as well as an ionosphere, and there is some illumination similar to Earths airglow, when the Suns UV emissions(planar wavefronts) activate chemical processes that produce those non-existent photons!
There are also very dim light sources such as the Gegenshein, which still puzzle the scientists.
NASA haven't been telling us the truth about lighting conditions in space for a long time though, and even though NOBODY knows what light really is, we have learned enough about how it behaves to produce some pretty incredible technology based on what we DO know.
Image forensics of Apollo images: Youtube vid.
www.youtube.com...
Good to see some decent decorum totallackey, and an enquiring mind. Don't be put off by some of the tight ATS defence line that tries to sack all scientific and intellectual curiosity!

reply to post by GaryN


WRONG the picture you show of the sun has been taken to SHOW the Sun spots as you can see the one I linked to the sun is OVER EXPOSED so it's a brilliant white disc!!!!!

So to prove my point were your picture was posted!!!!

mcalisterium.wordpress.com...

Your Picture

Exposure details for your picture
200mm | ISO 50 | f/13 | 1/8000sec | 10 stop ND filter

You said this

Originally posted by GaryN
ISO 50 | f/13 | 1/8000sec | 10 stop ND filter (that makes f/23)

Want to tells us how you worked out f23 its a 10 stop filter it's not f23

My Picture



Of course the shadow on his arm is caused by the Sun its behind him

The logic you apply shows you dont have a clue!!!

With regards to your youtube link above I will answer that later Hoaxland etc like YOU don't have a clue what they are talking about in fact I will show you they used edited pictures for their examples and NOT the actual image as shot

reply to post by jra


Thank you for taking the time to provide me the reading material...sans the sarcasm and condescending tenor in your reply. I appreciate it.

reply to post by GaryN


Thank you for your reply. I have questions about the whole process and they are troubling. It is not that I do not believe we have not been to the moon or in space, but I have questions and I do not like when people talk to me as if I am incapable of understanding or not interested in learning.

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

I understand the elements present in our atmosphere provide a filter through which our eyes detect the color of objects as each object reflects the sunlight from it. If I was on Mars, grass may not be green.

You are trying to tell me grass would be green on the moon?

WHAT colour is the stars and stripes on the Moon.



Looks the right colours to me

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

I know the atmosphere diffraction here on Earth causes a great deal of effect on how we perceive color.

YOU don't know because your assumption is wrong

reply to post by wmd_2008

I do know because it is the truth. Light diffraction does take place and items appear different colors depending on the type of light striking them. We do not experience a pure white light here on Earth.

Ok I've held back long enough. Source your claims. I have never seen any such information. Ever.

Originally posted by totallackey
I do know because it is the truth. Light diffraction does take place and items appear different colors depending on the type of light striking them. We do not experience a pure white light here on Earth.

No.

Stuff appears to have the color that it has because of what wavelengths of visible light it adsorbs, and what wavelengths it does not adsorb (i.e., the wavelengths it reflects).

For example, a green leaf generally absorbs all other visible light wavelengths except blue and yellow. It absorbs the red wavelength. There fore we only see the blue and yellow reflected light, and those combine to look green.

It doesn't matter if that leaf is on Earth, on the Moon, or in space. The stuff that makes up that leaf will still absorb red and reflect back blue and yellow. The location of the leaf will not change what wavelengths of visible light it reflects (I mean, why would it?).

I DO AGREE WITH YOU that on some planets, haze in the atmosphere may pre-absorb some the visible light spectrum, and that may cause the visible light falling on on the leaf to be lacking in certain wavelengths to begin with, thus altering what is reflected. I suppose that if a planet's atmosphere absorbed all the blue and yellow out of the visible spectrum before the light struck the leaf, the leaf would look black.

However, on Earth the visible light spectrum is quite complete under normal circumstances, so what we see on earth will be the same color as what we see on the moon or in interplanetary space in our solar system.

Basically, because Earth's atmosphere allows virtually the entire visible light spectrum to pass through it, we actually see the true visible light colors of things (at least "true" to our human eyes).

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


Just to be pedentic... or FYI

Mixing yellow and blue light makes white. Yellow is comprised of red and green; add blue and you get an RGB mix resulting in white. Chlorophyll absorbs more blue and red light, compared to green, hence plants being green.

Originally posted by BagBing
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Just to be pedentic... or FYI

Mixing yellow and blue light makes white. Yellow is comprised of red and green; add blue and you get an RGB mix resulting in white. Chlorophyll absorbs more blue and red light, compared to green, hence plants being green.

edit on 10-9-2012 by BagBing because: (no reason given)

Thanks for the info!

I was looking at it from an artistic color-wheel standpoint (opaque color pigments) rather than colors of light.

In the world of color pigments, the three primary colors (the colors that cannot be made, but can be used to make all of the other colors) are red, yellow, and blue -- with red+yellow=orange, yellow+blue=green, and blue+red =violet). The three primary colors are primary because they cannot be created by mixing pigments, while all of the other colors can.

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

I do know because it is the truth. Light diffraction does take place and items appear different colors depending on the type of light striking them. We do not experience a pure white light here on Earth.

You are trying to claim that the density of the atmosphere effects the colour seen by us or a camera then answer this WATER is far denser than the atmosphere and has greater refractive index.

interactagram.com...

Scroll down and use the refraction simulator

Why can an object above the water any colour be filmed underwater with an underwater camera and the colour will be the same as above the surface

reply to post by wmd_2008


H2O is H20...If there is light reaching it, then the color will be the same, and the process you are referring to is still taking place HERE ON EARTH, in our conditions...Understand?

reply to post by PsykoOps


The claim is the Earth has atmosphere. The Moon's atmosphere is different than that of Earth's. Do you really need me to source that information?

Well I guess you can provide with studies or some sources how that impact light reflection. I mean if it's so common and stuff. Never mind reading the other members replies...

reply to post by PsykoOps


Actually, the sources I have read here posted by other members, such as wmd and Soylent have been quite helpful. Of course, all of them are directly sourced and conducted from our experience here on Earth.

I have been unlucky and cannot post any experimental findings conducted outside the atmosphere of Earth. I cannot test the findings or subject them to falsification.

What else should I post? I am simply trying to understand this. That is all. Okay with you? Or do I need a further form of permit? Are you handing them out? Do I need an apple? Or do you prefer oranges?

Originally posted by totallackey
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

H2O is H20...If there is light reaching it, then the color will be the same, and the process you are referring to is still taking place HERE ON EARTH, in our conditions...Understand?

Its not, YOU are claiming the atmosphere on earth effects what colours our eyes or a camera sees WATER is far more dense than air so should effect it if the camera and object are both under water,same with the Moon a vacuum so less dense so that should also be a problem and that's what you claim.

Watch this a toy Robbie the robot at the end of a weather balloon sent up to 95,000 feet the atmosphere is very thin compared to ground level does he change colour. NO!!!!!!!



Is this now enough proof or do we have to strap you to a weather balloon

reply to post by totallackey


You might be reffering to the fact that our atmosphere scatters the blue part of light spectrum, which is what makes the sky blue and sunsets red, right?

In any case, it's one thing to say that our atmosphere somewhat affects the colour we see, and completely another thing to say that we need an atmosphere to see colours. We see colours because light comes in different wavelengths. That wavelength stays the same whether photons travel through air or though vacuum.

reply to post by wmd_2008


Good stuff!
But the astronauts said they saw no stars....

Originally posted by violence=answer
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

Good stuff!
But the astronauts said they saw no stars....

edit on 11-9-2012 by violence=answer because: your mom

Many astronauts said they saw stars. You just need to be in a relative darkness and let your eyes adjust. Any bright light spoils your dark vision. arstechnica.com...

Originally posted by violence=answer
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

Good stuff!
But the astronauts said they saw no stars....

edit on 11-9-2012 by violence=answer because: your mom

The surface of the moon is bright. The astronauts eyes became acclimated to the brightness of the Moon (their pupils would constrict), so while the bright surface of the Moon was in their field of view, they could not see the stars.

I suppose if an astronaut tilted his head back and looked straight up (if he could while wearing the spacesuit), his eyes could be averted from the bright surface, and I suppose, given time, his eyes could acclimate to the darkness (his pupils would open up). Maybe then, he would see stars.