Today's APOD 26.08.21

[Zummerzet_Leveller]

Anyone seen today's APOD, amazing how the moon is in front of the clouds!

I understand there is an element of art in some of these but this one just made me face palm.

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

[Adam J]

Yeah that just looks fake because it is.  If i was generious then i would say its a product of two exposures, one for the moon and one for the foreground and that the clouds moved between the two exposures. 

Edited August 26, 2021 by Adam J

[Dinglem]

Well it's obviously fake @Adam J as the whole sky isn't covered in clouds ☁️

[david_taurus83]

I think it's genuine. The lower part of the cloud looks thin so the moons brightness shines through. I have often observed the moon with thin low clouds passing by and have seen this effect many times. 

[Gfamily]

The same photographer claimed the image below 'was a thing'.

[Zummerzet_Leveller]

1 hour ago, david_taurus83 said:

I think it's genuine. The lower part of the cloud looks thin so the moons brightness shines through. I have often observed the moon with thin low clouds passing by and have seen this effect many times. 

I'm sure it's a composite image. To get the exposure on the mountain the moon would definitely be blown out with no definition. The lines of the moon are very clean in front of the cloud too.

[Felias]

A composite can very much look like that when there's a full moon. Yes, you need two exposures, and you have to paste the moon or combine them somehow, but you don't have to wait for the clouds to roll past. Here's a shot I took in April; the whole sky is covered, but the clouds are thin enough for the moon to shine through. I promise I did not cheat (if you consider double exposures legit, that is). 😇

[CraigT82]

Noting wrong with composites of different exposures. It's done in DSO imaging all the time. Would be impossible to get any kind of decent image of M42 without it. 

 

[ollypenrice]

OK, you've all lost me. I can see no moon in the APOD-linked image from the first post. Where is it? (This is slightly worrying! )

On 27/08/2021 at 00:52, Gfamily said:

The same photographer claimed the image below 'was a thing'.

Since this image states clearly how it was made and why, I can see no objection to it provided the camera was precisely relocated each time. (Important because the position of the moon is a natural phenomenon when the camera's position is constant.)

Olly

[Davey-T]

8 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

OK, you've all lost me. I can see no moon in the APOD-linked image from the first post. Where is it? (This is slightly worrying!

But on the other hand todays APOD is much more interesting 😂

Dave

[Gfamily]

21 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

OK, you've all lost me. I can see no moon in the APOD-linked image from the first post. Where is it? (This is slightly worrying! )

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap210826.html

[Gfamily]

24 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Since this image states clearly how it was made and why, I can see no objection to it provided the camera was precisely relocated each time. (Important because the position of the moon is a natural phenomenon when the camera's position is constant.)

Olly

What baffles me is why the altitude of the moon drops between new moon and first quarter. 

Clearly the images weren't taken at the same time of day, so what's behind the thinking for them being arranged in that shape curve?

Am I missing something? 

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, Gfamily said:

https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap210826.html

Ah, a different picture from that in the link. All is revealed! I've no idea whether or not the brightness of the moon would overwhelm the foreground clouds. I'll need to take a shot myself to find out.

Olly

[wimvb]

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Ah, a different picture from that in the link

Unfortunately the link in the original post isn’t a permanent link; the web page’s contents are updated daily (nightly), with the latest apod. Confusing if you wish to link to a specific image.

[ollypenrice]

23 minutes ago, wimvb said:

Unfortunately the link in the original post isn’t a permanent link; the web page’s contents are updated daily (nightly), with the latest apod. Confusing if you wish to link to a specific image.

Well, looking for the moon kept me out of trouble for a few minutes... 

🤣lly

[Zummerzet_Leveller]

18 hours ago, Felias said:

A composite can very much look like that when there's a full moon. Yes, you need two exposures, and you have to paste the moon or combine them somehow, but you don't have to wait for the clouds to roll past. Here's a shot I took in April; the whole sky is covered, but the clouds are thin enough for the moon to shine through. I promise I did not cheat (if you consider double exposures legit, that is). 😇

I'm all for composite images, I've done the same myself. I just like to keep them as accurate as possible, as you have done in your image.  The APOD image was just a bit too far for me.

[JamesF]

On 26/08/2021 at 23:53, Zummerzet_Leveller said:

To get the exposure on the mountain the moon would definitely be blown out with no definition.

I'm struggling with that, I have to admit.  The focus on both the Moon and the mountain looks pretty good too, which doesn't quite feel right.

James

[JamesF]

On 26/08/2021 at 23:52, Gfamily said:

The same photographer claimed the image below 'was a thing'.

I'm not sure I understand her comment about "the position" of the Moon.  One can presumably have it in pretty much any "position" one likes depending on the time of day, and clearly they can't all have been taken at the same time of day.  Some look as though they may well have been taken during daylight.  Perhaps it's an error in translation (Ho ho, see what I did there?).

As a visualisation of how the Moon appears to change over the course of a month I don't have a problem with it though.  Certainly no more than I have with the idea that the Moon has "phases" in the first place.

James

Edited August 30, 2021 by JamesF

[Gfamily]

2 hours ago, JamesF said:

I'm struggling with that, I have to admit.  The focus on both the Moon and the mountain looks pretty good too, which doesn't quite feel right.

James

That's one part I don't have a problem with.

I'd guess it's imaged with a high f/ ratio system,  so the circle of confusion (which determines what is in focus at different depths in an image) is not going to be an issue for two (or three) elements that are all at a substantial distance from the camera.