Dec 07 APOD Discussion right here

gwenyi · Post by **gwenyi** » Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:46 pm

haha. this kind of stuff gotta leave to all the professional photo analysts for confirmation ... but.. then again.. it could be done by playing around with the stuff available to the photographer. something lyk ufo photography, where they throw dishes before taking the pic =X

cheers.

A 5 YeaR Old · Post by **A 5 YeaR Old** » Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:31 pm

that streak seems to hit that lamp post and cause a bright spot or something. Looks weird...
I'm not gonna jump to conclusions too soon... lol, a UFO(not alien)

Anyway, APOD is kinda sub-average, i mean, it recycles photos.....
22 August 2004: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040822.html
10 August 2002: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020810.html
27 November 2000: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap001127.html

And pictures which arent worth notice are the Picture of the Day
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041015.html

but well.... it offers some time to kill for a newbie.

Grievous · Post by **Grievous** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 9:24 am

Actually, the pictures are selected for its 'punch' value that signifies the advancement of technology in the field of Astronomy as well as day to day images submitted by various institutes around the globe. For the recycling part, 2 reasons - 1. Pictures are not submitted everyday due to unforeseen circumstances as well as the problem of processing the pic due to its enormous size. 2. pictures are selected primary theme or happening of the day if there was one.

By the way, i check the site everyday.

As for the curious pic, i'll say someone used a rifle and target practise? could be a possibility!?

Charlie

AGMI · Post by **AGMI** » Tue Dec 14, 2004 10:19 am

but it seems to come from some high area

AGMI · Post by **AGMI** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:06 pm

ok so the besst explanation on APOD was an insect flying pass the lens and the light bulb is a lamp turning on and exploded

A 5 YeaR Old · Post by **A 5 YeaR Old** » Wed Dec 22, 2004 1:25 pm

what a coincidence.....
fly alight with lamppost, lamppost explodes, fly causes a streak.....
a bit unbelievable

MooEy · Post by **MooEy** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:27 am

that pic is 4623734676537536% fake la. see har, during such a day, ur shutter speed is prolly 1/125 of a sec, to be able to catch such a thing, the object must be stupidly bright and fast so that it will even cause a trail on the film.

also, the photographer must be ultra lucky, luckier than any shit in the world to catch such a scene with a 1/125 click. think of it, the trail cut thru the entire of a frame, where the background is just some crap. who will spend so much time shooting a crappy area lydat and expect to get something.

if's the photo is something real, then that trail must be a occuring on a regular basis at a specific time, or else he will never be able to capture it.

~MooEy~

carlogambino · Post by **carlogambino** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:24 pm

I don't think its a fly in the first place. Contrail shadow sounds the best ans to me.

AGMI · Post by **AGMI** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 6:34 pm

well the official answer to that pic is an insect (not stated or did i not read the full detail?). what a coincedence

carlogambino · Post by **carlogambino** » Thu Dec 23, 2004 10:30 pm

Well I guess I was wrong. Though it isnt a contrail shadow, I still find it hard to believe its an insect flying past the lens. As for lamps, there was no lampost exploding at all(according to the webby, read below). Also, as for fraud, I don't really think so

Look as quoted:"there is strong evidence that the image is genuine. All three of the images have their EXIF headers intact, and there is no sign of manipulation by any processing application. All three images have nearly identical signal-to-noise values across common areas, something that would be difficult to achieve if only one were doctored. There is also no sign of double JPEG encoding (the decimation boundaries are the same on all three, and are regular). It also doesn't look like most people would expect a meteor to look, and the point of the "explosion" doesn't correspond to any physical object. These seem like odd choices for someone perpetrating a hoax, when the other technical details were handled so well."

Also, for those against lampost exploding theory, here's the ans given: "The "explosion" near the lamppost is simply the insect being illuminated by the camera flash."

I think those interested would certainly want to look at the full explanation(its long) on this webby: http://www.cloudbait.com/science/darwin.html