>>
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.
A good CCD astrocamera can cost thousands...plus a quality telescope
on a quality mount with an autoguider...more thousands.
--
Steve Sharpe
[email protected]
http://earth.delith.com/photo_gallery.html
--
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.
