(meteorobs) Great fireball photo(s) on APOD

[Jan Verfl]

I doubt it. The stars in the center are perfect points, the stretching is
radial around the center - it is coma, not eatrh movement. It is easily seen
at the corners. 

Let me do some maths. The picture is, say 50 degrees accros (I do not know
the southern sky well enough to track the constelations, but I know how the
milky way looks:), ant it is 3000px, so we have about 1px/arcmin.The stars
in the center are very good,i don't believe they are even 1 px blurred. The
sky rotates 15 deg/hour = 15 arcmin/min, so this is no longer than 30 s
exposure (what is indeed the rule of thumb for a 50-mm lens astrophoto). 

I am not an expert on astrophotography, but from my puny attemps it seems
highly unlikely for my to get a detailet milky-way structure in 30 s, even
on a very high iso. Anyway, it is a great picture, we all do the
picture-adding cheats, so let it live:)

Jan 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org 
> [mailto:meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org] On Behalf Of stange
> Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 6:15 PM
> To: Global Meteor Observing Forum
> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Great fireball photo(s) on APOD
> 
> Click on the image and blow it up. You will see the camera is 
> NOT tracking 
> at all. The stars are stretched from celestial motion.
> 
> It is a genuine short period photo without equatorial 
> tracking of any kind.
> 
> I do astrophotography now and then. :-)  YCS
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <GeoZay at aol.com>
> To: <meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
> Sent: 2008/06/29 09:06
> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) Great fireball photo(s) on APOD
> 
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >>>Other than the insert, I do not believe any massaging was 
> done  on that
> > photo. I have seen supurb photos of the MW from Austrailia 
> before  on
> > Astronomy websites and they do not need low Lux cameras in 
> long  exposure 
> > or
> > any touchup. A plain camera will do  it.<<
> > It's a nice image, but it's more than obvious that some kind of 
> > manipulation
> > has been done to this photograph. If you get pinpoint 
> stars, you  will end 
> > up
> > with blurred land features that are in the same photograph. 
> I use to  do 
> > it
> > all the time. Never been able to get both pinpoint stars 
> and non  blurred 
> > land
> > features from the same exposure. You can come close, but 
> not good  enuf 
> > where
> > you can't tell it.
> >
> >>>The backlighting of the foreground brush was probably from 
> a  small 
> >>>camping
> > light.<<
> > Perhaps and maybe even a weak strobe flash,  but that 
> doesn't explain  the
> > relatively sharp outline of Ayers rock, nor the sharp cloud 
> features 
> > along the
> > horizon. Clouds along the horizon will appear relatively 
> stationary  just 
> > like
> > land features and should appear blurred if the camera is 
> tracking the
> > stars...which it apparently is.
> > GeoZay
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for
> > fuel-efficient used cars. 
> > (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007)
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> > http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list meteorobs: meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email: owner-meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
>