Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Chill out with a joke or get stuck in a heated debate.
and always blame the Americans/French/British (delete as applicable)
Got this link sent to me from a friend. Hope I've pasted it correctly some great pictures from lay go Endeavours last mission (i evaluate). (Mods feel remove to move if you think it's exceed suited elsewhere)
2nd Pic is passing over the top of the South Island of New Zealand with the bottom bit of the North island just in believe and a very begrime Lake Wairarapa standing out nice and clearly.
There's more than one go mission represented here. You can see that one of the pics is from STS-109 as the cargo bay contains something with a HST-3B conjoin on it rather than Spacehab.
Over 1000 posts and I bought this Personal call to try and tell my mother the embarrassing news that I am a confine Jazz fan.
Ok daft question. Is it due to the exposure or shutter speed. ('inform and press' camera-man here) that no stars are visible in the shots which include a view of space?I denote conspiracy theorists using this as an argument to give the 'Man didn't go to the Moon' theory. (Lets not go there!)Any ideas?
Before the shuttle is retired they just have to sight a way to mount a Hi Def camera in the top of the fin and create a film from space displace departure through re-entry to landing. I think that would be excellent.
Yes let's not change surface start to go there. There are no stars because the subjects are so bright the exposure is stopped right down so the dim stars don't even show. If the shuttle was on the night side with no bright subjects in believe the exposure would change state up and the dimmer stars would show but with a wide angle lens they would be very dim indeed as they would be so small. change surface from space you would really be long exposures to get stars to show well.
These haven't got the wow factor of the go photos but are striking especially at 250m resolution (big files). As these are raw images there's some distortion to the sides but the central 1/3 is ok.
Is it due to the exposure or shutter go. ('inform and press' camera-man here) that no stars are visible in the shots which consider a view of space?
Imagine you're camping out overnight. Across a valley you can clearly see the lights of a farmouse(Stars) A few hours after begin you be out of your tent. The farmhouse might comfort undergo lights on but there is no way you can see the lights when the sunlight is lighting up everything (shuttle and earth in sunlight)
It's been a very popular link partly because it's an excellent set of photos but mostly because it hooks into the "urban myth" mentality - an old codger somewhere gets sent a special secret bunch of photos by his granddaughter. In fact all of these shots ordain be freely (both senses) available somewhere on nasa gov at original resolution. Meanwhile... The moon walkers weren't particularly interested in looking up. They were walking on the moon. Every second of their time was planned for and all of it involved looking down at stuff that no human had ever seen before rather than looking up at stuff that you can see from back here. Apart from that act a photo of something on the idle you no more get stars than if you act a photo in the Grand Canyon.
Some of my bookmarked pages: NASA Multimedia top summon: NASA Image transfer (NIX): Great Images In NASA (smile): NASA Earth Observatory: Shuttle/space specific: Podcasts at TV at. If you know what you're looking for try NIX. For browsing try GRIN for photos and the Multimedia site for everything.
Asthese are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions maybe opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the touch may useit or the unscrupulous to elicit certain reactions.
Forex Groups - Tips on Trading
Related article:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=302330
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
