On Sep 10, 2011, at 05:10 , Steve Sharpe wrote: > At 7:47 AM -0400 9/10/11, Mark Roberts wrote: >> Cotty wrote: >> >>> On 9/9/11, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed: >>> >>>> Wow. Just wow. >> >>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14792580 >>> >>> Totally. Though the winner is a composite image which surprises me. >> >> Yes, that really surprised me. Perhaps the original photo showed the >> two moons with Jupiter but not with good definition and the separate >> images were brought in to enhance their appearance? I'd like to know >> more about the situation. > > That's the situation. Jupiter would be over 100 times brighter than the > moons, so a properly exposed image of Jupiter would have the moons barely > registering...and a properly exposed image of the moons would have Jupiter > incredibly overexposed. > > Those deep-sky photos probably required exposures on the order of a day or > more...
If you subscribe to APOD, you will realize that many of those fabulous shots are composites. It's just data, so they have no problem combining 15 year old Hubble images with recent images of the same thing shot through four or five different filters to show the lovely filaments of oxygen, hydrogen, carbon and others. If the big guys can do it, so can the little guys. By the way, many of those winning images were shot using equipment that all of PDML could not afford to rent, even. All show an excellent command of tracking and exposure. I am happy that they were brought to our attention. If it doesn’t excite you, This thing that you see, Why in the world, Would it excite me? —Jay Maisel Joseph McAllister [email protected] -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
