Post

Oh, wow, you can see just how thin the atmosphere is!

Yes. Oh ok, thanks!

wait i think i didn't really pose this well. not the specks but the structured outer ring. i think what i'm seeing for the first time is the "limb" according to my quick search? like my conception of where i would see something...didn't go that far out. is that it?

What is the light bloom in almost the dead center of the Earth, South west of Africa? Is that just particularly bright clouds?

Oh that's neat. I was wondering what the extended haze to the lower right was.

Oh, you’re right! I thought the big landmass on the left was Iberia and South America was the Algerian coast.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for these details I surely would have missed if they had not been pointed out to me! Each detail makes the image more amazing!

Thanks for the context ✨🙏🏽🥰 love to understand a bit more

So Australia really is at the top - we’ve been saying this for years

Thank you. I thought it was probably Venus but was looking for confirmation.

Spacecraft windowframe, most likely

A masterclass in government comms.

Just saying, obviously most planets are girls except for Pluto who is a boy, and Uranus who is nonbinary.

Nice. (They should post that here!)

You could improve my health and wellness significantly by jumping in the largest skip you can find. Then wait.

I do quite a bit of landscape astrophotography, and that's simply not true.

If you take a long exposure photograph of a moonlit scene, it can look just like daylight. Because it is in fact the same light.

You are a bit of a plonker. If you take a photo of the moon at night it is still pretty bright because, as is obvious to anyone with a brain, reflected light from the sun can still be pretty bright. Now imagine taking a photo of the [larger than the moon] earth from closer than the moon...hmmm🤔

This is actually because of the anatomy of the human eye. The rods on our retinas are good at low-light conditions, but the cones are responsible for color. But cameras aren't eyeballs. www.livescience.com/health/neuro...

"Go outside on a full moon and nearly nothing is in color." Hey, congratulations man, that's quite possibly the dumbest thing you'll ever say or post on the internet. A hell of an achievement. From here on out it can only get better.

"Contact me if you want to improve your health and wellness" <-- Nah, I'm good, thanks anyway. Well I will be once I've recovered from the mansplaining you're trying to do.

Fucks sake mate, you're arguing with someone right at the top of their game in astrophysics. Time to step back, yeah.

Probably best not to share a color-enhanced image to counter claims about a faked photo.

Is this a single image? It’s stunning

Set your camera up for long exposure instead, if yours have issues with high ISO colors. This is just three seconds, but enough for the colors to start emerging.

You can absolutely tweak out colors from images taken in the dark. As long as you know where to set the white balance, not a big deal.

Her PhD is in astrophysics. Hth!

Call your ophthalmologist bud.

“How could NASA, in space with no air or light pollution, with one of the most sensitive cameras ever made, take a better picture than me!?”

If only there were people involved in the mission with expertise in space photography.

I don't think that man has ever even been far enough outside a city to see the Milk Way.

It's one thing to think the moon landing was a hoax, but imagine thinking colour photography can't be real.

The version of the image posted on the NASA instagram page has the exposure less enhanced, if that helps? www.instagram.com/p/DWrVlNlDdz...

Cleanup in the camera aisle: "Boomer Health & Wellness Coach Thrown Into Orbit Around the Sun After Mansplaining Astrophotography to TED-speaking Ph.D. Astrophysicist & Hawking Chair in Cosmology."

In a way, this Earth photo is somewhat altered. They used heavy color noise reduction. You can tell because the noise is monochromatic. In a raw image with as little processing as possible, the noise in the image would be a lot more colorful.

Unlike human eyes, which are less sensitive to color in the dark, digital camera sensors are equally sensitive to color in dark settings as in bright settings. That's why Aurora photos look more colorful in a photo than to the naked eye.

And they used quite heavy color noise reduction. The raw photo would have much more colorful noise. I wonder if they got the JPEG from the camera, or if they got a raw file and processed and converted it to a JPEG on Earth.

I almost thought this was sarcasm. Nope. It was plain old stupidity. 🤦‍♂️

God. Bless. You! I could not figure out the angle.

It seems the brightness apearing in the Atlantic off the coast of Africa is likely internal reflection from the window of Integrity???