« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down

"Star-trails"

  • 126 Replies
  • 48429 Views
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-40
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #30 on: June 05, 2009, 08:59:02 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 05, 2009, 08:56:04 AM
Quote from: levee on June 05, 2009, 07:13:57 AM
Let us read from the book of Enoch:

As I said at the top of the thread: please show me a picture or a sketch to support this.

No evidence = no belief.

That's how science works.

Science? Please look carefully at the above posted pictures taken on the Port Credit beach.

No curvature whatsoever, the earth is flat; and NOW I tell you how things work around here; my research has uncovered the fact that there are three kinds of stellar orbits, those which are fixed over the North/South Pole, called circumpolar, and regular orbits, exactly what YOUR photos show. Thank you.
Logged
?

Skeptik

Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #31 on: June 05, 2009, 09:15:33 AM »
Your pictures show nothing. You need to back up more than a few hundread meters to see the curvature of the Earth, this is EARTH, not a tiny thing we're talking about here.
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #32 on: June 05, 2009, 10:04:39 AM »
Quote from: levee on June 05, 2009, 08:59:02 AM
Science? Please look carefully at the above posted pictures taken on the Port Credit beach.

Which has nothing to do with star-trails whatsoever.

Quote from: levee on June 05, 2009, 08:59:02 AM
No curvature whatsoever, the earth is flat; and NOW I tell you how things work around here; my research has uncovered the fact that there are three kinds of stellar orbits, those which are fixed over the North/South Pole, called circumpolar, and regular orbits, exactly what YOUR photos show. Thank you.

My photos (well, NASA's) show that stars only move in circles (not elipses) around either the North or South Celstial Poles, with those along the Celestial Equator moving in straight lines.

All of which can be explained simply and perfectly by the Round Earth model.

Please show me some evidence - a photo, or a sketch at least - to contradict my evidence/conclsuions.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #33 on: June 05, 2009, 10:10:51 AM »
Quote from: levee on June 05, 2009, 08:57:15 AM
How about this? Totally digitally remastered, and then given to the public, to accept it without murmur.

Digital enhancing, or re-mastering, is not the same as faking.

If I can see a dark shadow of someone standing in my yard/garden and then I turn on the yard/garden lights it is the same person - I can just see them more clearly with the lights on.

(The same would go for using or not using night vision goggles.)

Both perceptions of reality are true, but one is clearer.

Edit: correct spelling.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2009, 10:28:00 AM by 3 Tesla »
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #34 on: June 05, 2009, 10:32:04 AM »
Quote from: levee on June 05, 2009, 08:57:15 AM
The Black Sun also has shadows over its surface, which could resemble those of the Moon.

Dark shadows *and* bright craters on two independent bodies lying in excatly the same locations and having exactly the same proportions?

Whilst that is always possible, it has to be very, very improbable.

But we are not debating The Moon or The Black Sun here - it is all about those perfectly circular star-trails which do not make any sense in the Flat Earth Model.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #35 on: June 06, 2009, 03:07:21 AM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 04, 2009, 10:37:25 PM
You're also assuming that in the areas above the gaps of the celestial disks there aren't other celestial disks moving in the same general direction as the ones below them.

Oh wow!

Now we not only have multiple, counter-rotating, gear-driven star systems in the Flat Earth night sky ...

We have a multitude of counter-rotating, gear-driven star systems behind each other in the Flat Earth night sky!

That is the single, clearest case of "entities [being] multiplied unnecessarily" - the basis of Occam's razor* - that I have ever come across.

Please contrast this hypothesis with this one (the one I believe):

The Earth is a globe which spins on its axis, and is set in a sky where the stars are an incedible distance away and so appear to be set in sphere which surrounds the spherical Earth seamlessly.

Much simpler; much more believable.

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #36 on: June 06, 2009, 03:34:49 AM »
OK - let's crank my argument up a gear:

What about The Milky Way?

Let's not argue about wether it's made up of stars (our galaxy) or gas (a nebula) ...

But can we agree that you can see it (in dark areas without street-lights, at least) in both the Northern and Southern Hemi-spheres / Hemi-discs?

So if The World is flat, then The Milky Way has to sit on at least two of Tom Bishop's counter-rotating, gear-driven star-systems, right?

Which means that at some point in the rotation, the parts of The Milky Way at the edges of the two gears must separate as they spin apart from each other (see diagram below).

How come nobody has ever photographed that happening - The Milky Way splitting in two?

Can you explain that, Tom?

In the Round Earth model, the night sky is a continuous sphere so there is no problem with The Milky Way.

Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18033
  • +6/-9
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #37 on: June 06, 2009, 02:14:02 PM »
What makes you think that there would be gaps or voids anywhere? The sky is filled with stars wherever you look. There are likely layers of bodies which fill every square inch of the night sky.
Logged
?

NTheGreat

  • 1019
  • +0/-0
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #38 on: June 06, 2009, 02:59:55 PM »
Quote
What makes you think that there would be gaps or voids anywhere? The sky is filled with stars wherever you look. There are likely layers of bodies which fill every square inch of the night sky.

It's probably because circular gears do not tessellate.
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #39 on: June 07, 2009, 03:46:37 AM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 06, 2009, 02:14:02 PM
What makes you think that there would be gaps or voids anywhere? The sky is filled with stars wherever you look. There are likely layers of bodies which fill every square inch of the night sky.

Yes, it would be possible to fill the whole night sky with stars if there were extra star-studded gears whirring away behind the star-studded gears in the foreground ...

But ...

Such stacked, star-studded gears could not produce the gradually changing star-trails photographs of stars either side of The Celestial Equator like this one:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap090314.html

There is absolutely no way that you can use a 2D, flat-disc geometry to reproduce perfectly the star trails that so many people see around The World, because these are caused by the inherently 3D, spherical geometry of a spherical Earth spinning in a spherical sky.

I will only be convinced otherwise if you can demonstrate a pattern of gears which can recreate the above picture perefectly - and good luck with that, because there are hundreds of closely-packed stars in that picture, all with paths/orbits which are infinitesimally different to those of their neighbours (there are no sudden changes in direction which you have to have with gears).

And while you are at it, please could you also provide a detailed mathematical proof of how your "bendy light" can distort the ellipitial star-trails that one would see from one of your 2D "star gears" - as caused by perspective - back into the perfect circles that we can actually see. Please do this for at least two observers who are a different distance away from the point directly under the disc's axis of rotation, for the sake of academic rigour.

Without being able to explain away the above two observations, your Flat-Earth Model is dead.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

Moon squirter

  • 1405
  • +0/-0
  • Ding dong!
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #40 on: June 07, 2009, 01:59:37 PM »
Quote from: Tom Bishop on June 06, 2009, 02:14:02 PM
There are likely layers of bodies which fill every square inch of the night sky.

Well it seems FET has evolved before our eyes to correct an inconsistency with observations.

Tom, can you please update the FAQ with this new "Layers of Stars" model.
Logged
Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 01, 2012, 01:00:09 PM
I haven't performed it and I've never claimed to. I've have trouble being in two places at the same time.
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #41 on: June 07, 2009, 02:41:13 PM »
Quote from: Moon squirter on June 07, 2009, 01:59:37 PM
Tom, can you please update the FAQ with this new "Layers of Stars" model.

The "layers of counter-rotating, gear-driven star-systems" model  ...

To give it its posh title.

Edit - that's screaming out for an acronym:

"Multiple, layered, counter-rotating, gear-driven, disc-like star-systems" =

MLCRGDDLSS
« Last Edit: June 08, 2009, 02:22:18 AM by 3 Tesla »
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #42 on: June 08, 2009, 02:20:30 AM »
So far there are three night-sky observations which do not fit with the Flat Earth Model ("multiple, layered, counter-rotating, gear-driven, disc-like star-systems", or MLCRGDDLSS):

1. Star-trails are circular, not elipitical (there is no perspective distortion)

2. Star-trails form a smooth, continuous pattern (there are no sudden deviations in course) and

3. The Milky Way is a continous band from north to south (it never splits in two).

Now here is a fourth:

If there is one MLCRGDDL star-system sitting over The North Pole, then all observers in The Northern Hemi-disc will see the stars rotate around a point which is due North (by the compass).

Now that point is, more or less, the star known as Polaris (The Pole Star) and it is accepted that this is north and has been helping sailors navigate in The Northern Hemispeher for centuries.

(So far, so good.)

But ...

If there is also another MLCRGDDL star-system sitting somewhere south of Australia then it cannot be sat above The South Pole because this does not exist on a Flat Earth (lines of longitude continue to diverge forever, just as on The UN flag.)

Therefore ...

Observers at different longitudes in Australia - and it is a very wide continent so there is a wide range of longitudes to choose from - will see the star-system rotate around a point which is at a different compass bearing (i.e. not always due south).

So how come nobody has ever, to my knowledge, reported such an observation?

An observation which would clearly disprove the existance of The South Pole.

An observation which would prove that Amundsen, Scott, Oates, et al. were lying when they said that they walked there.

An observation which would prove that all of the astronomers have been lying to us all this time.

An observation which would be of almost infinite benefit to the Flat Earth Community as it would prove their theories.

So: have any of the Flat Eathers out there ever made such an observation ("he says, expecting the answer no" *)?

And if not, then you should all club together and buy a ticket to Australia ASAP and get observing!

(And I may ask my pal in Sydney to take a road trip to Perth sometime and do the measurements himself!)

So: four observations which do not make sense if The World were flat ...

Please explain.

* Monty Python's "Cheese Shop" sketch - "SHUT THAT BLOODY BAZUKI UP!"

Some edits, in blue.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2009, 02:24:30 AM by 3 Tesla »
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
?

dyno

  • 562
  • +0/-0
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #43 on: June 08, 2009, 03:27:40 AM »
I'm in Perth.
Logged
?

brathearon

  • 199
  • +0/-0
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #44 on: June 08, 2009, 05:29:16 AM »
man, i knew movements of planets and stars didnt fit the FE model, but geez, lol
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #45 on: June 08, 2009, 06:29:11 AM »
Quote from: dyno on June 08, 2009, 03:27:40 AM
I'm in Perth.

Western Australia, or Scotland?

:-)

Seriously, though - if you can measure the compass bearing of the apparent axis of rotation of the stars, I'll get my pal to do the same in Sydney (New South Wales).
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #46 on: June 08, 2009, 06:43:50 AM »
Quote from: brathearon on June 08, 2009, 05:29:16 AM
man, i knew movements of planets and stars didnt fit the FE model, but geez, lol

I know that too, but getting Tom Bishop and Levee to admit defeat is the name of this particular game ...
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #47 on: June 08, 2009, 07:53:48 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 08, 2009, 02:20:30 AM
If there is also another MLCRGDDL star-system sitting somewhere south of Australia then it cannot be sat above The South Pole because this does not exist on a Flat Earth (lines of longitude continue to diverge forever, just as on The UN flag.)

Therefore ...

Observers at different longitudes in Australia - and it is a very wide continent so there is a wide range of longitudes to choose from - will see the star-system rotate around a point which is at a different compass bearing (i.e. not always due south).

Here is a diagram illustrating my point:



The red compass bearings are identical - they are all due north ...

But the green compass bearings are different - and will usually not be due south.

Edit:

C = Perth, Western Australia; D = Sydney, New South Wales.

Also uploaded a slightly better diagram.
Old image = http://i44.tinypic.com/b9adjo.gif
« Last Edit: June 08, 2009, 09:48:26 AM by 3 Tesla »
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #48 on: June 08, 2009, 02:59:00 PM »
The .net site is back up and running, so you can read more star-trails-related posts here:

http://theflatearthsociety.net/forum/index.php?board=3.0
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
?

amanita muscaria

Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #49 on: June 08, 2009, 04:22:23 PM »
Quote from: levee on June 05, 2009, 08:17:41 AM
The complete demonstration that the Earth could not cause the lunar eclipse:

http://cercetare.forumgratuit.ro/teorii-ale-conspiraiei-mondiale-f19/moon-paradox-moon-eclipse-t52.htm#421
...
please read again the historical descriptions of the simultaneous lunar/solar eclipses, they cannot be denied.
Curious question: are there any documented sightings of this phenomena, for example, in the second half of the previous century? As there seems to be plenty of these in the 19th century I think there should be quite a lot of people who have seen this in the 1951-2000.
Logged
?

dyno

  • 562
  • +0/-0
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #50 on: June 08, 2009, 06:18:33 PM »
Perth Western Aus.
Yeah I can check the compass bearing.
Convincing Tombot and Lev isn't the point. Blind people can't see.
The point is to disprove their suggestions so that others don't believe them.
Logged
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-40
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #51 on: June 09, 2009, 03:21:11 AM »
Ancient sky charts show clearly that the star trails which are circumpolar (north and south) were well known; also well known was the fact that there regular orbits, which comprise the so called Milky Way.



http://www.native-science.net/images/image142.earthplace.02.jpg
http://www.native-science.net/images/image144.earthplace.04.finn.jpg
http://www.native-science.net/images/image143.earthplace.03.jpg


In this picture, everything was digitally altered, or enhanced; we are not talking here about conspiracy, but during these 22 digital image processing alterations, did they add onto the Black Sun a picture of the Moon? The original photo of 1999 did not contain the Moon shadow features.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990915.html

As we can see, the original photographs show NOTHING of those shadows:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990820.html

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990818.html

It is clear that the shadow picture was added onto the original Black Sun photograph of August 1999; not necessarily because of any conspiracy, but simply to enhance the overall image.

Here is another photograph which shows the original image, WITHOUT ANY SHADOWS:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990716.html

Therefore, my friends, please do your homework, before posting here altered, digitally enhanced (according to the author, 22 of them) pictures.
Logged
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-40
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #52 on: June 09, 2009, 03:44:50 AM »
Quote from: Skeptik on June 05, 2009, 09:15:33 AM
Your pictures show nothing. You need to back up more than a few hundread meters to see the curvature of the Earth, this is EARTH, not a tiny thing we're talking about here.

You do not understand what you are talking about; at a distance of 14.5 km, there should be a curvature of 4 meters, an ascending slope, you know the rest. In those 7-8 different photographs, the surface of the lake is completely flat, with no slopes whatsoever, and no curvature, we can see clearly the features of the opposing shoreline.

The numbers are very precise, your complaint amounts to nothing.
Logged
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #53 on: June 09, 2009, 04:17:03 AM »
Quote from: 3 Tesla on June 04, 2009, 07:19:00 AM
As shown in this photo which shows the Sun's corona along with the surface of the Moon which is facing The Earth:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080808.html

Quote from: levee on June 09, 2009, 03:21:11 AM
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990915.html

Quote from: levee on June 09, 2009, 03:21:11 AM
Here is another photograph which shows the original image, WITHOUT ANY SHADOWS:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap990716.html

Therefore, my friends, please do your homework, before posting here altered, digitally enhanced (according to the author, 22 of them) pictures.

Both of those pictures were *clearly* not taken at the same time as my original photo as the patterns of The Sun's corona are completely different.

So it is *your* "homework" which is faulty, not ours.

Edit: add link to original picture.

Besides: all three were taken by different people - just read the credits (properly)!

The quality of your (academic) research appears to be incredibly poor, and this undermines your arguments a great deal ...
« Last Edit: June 09, 2009, 04:23:51 AM by 3 Tesla »
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

3 Tesla

  • 808
  • +0/-0
  • Flat Earth double agent
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #54 on: June 09, 2009, 04:27:11 AM »
Quote from: levee on June 09, 2009, 03:21:11 AM
http://www.native-science.net/images/image142.earthplace.02.jpg
http://www.native-science.net/images/image144.earthplace.04.finn.jpg
http://www.native-science.net/images/image143.earthplace.03.jpg

What do these photographs/diagrams show?

Please could you explain them in more detail so that we can follow your arguments?

Please do all you can to help us to understand you.
Logged
"E pur si muove" ("And yet it moves"); Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-40
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #55 on: June 09, 2009, 04:37:12 AM »
Your original photo is not original at all, 3 Tesla. You have not read the comments made by the author. There are 28 digital images which make up that photograph.

What I am asking is this: as we have seen, the original August 1999 photo did not include any shadows, and later photographs, such as that taken in 2001, was clearly enhanced to add these features, then, did this author of the photograph follow the same procedure? Did he add, just to enhance the picture, during those 28 image processing alterations, the picture of a Moon onto the original?

Do not try to play words with me; I have proven to you that the original pictures taken in 1999 DO NOT INCLUDE ANY MOON SHADOWS, THE AUTHOR (NASA OFFICIAL) OF THE 2001 PICTURE SAYS THAT THE PICTURES HE TOOK WERE DIGITALLY ENHANCED, AND THIS AUTHOR, LUETHEN, MIGHT HAVE ALSO FOLLOWED THE SAME PROCEDURE.

Here is a picture taken from that day in Novosibirsk, in Russia, August 1 2008 WITH NO MOON SHADOWS WHATSOEVER:



http://www.spaceweather.com/eclipses/gallery_01aug08_page2.htm?PHPSESSID=g9b2ruudqibkb11pp39pqa8p66

http://www.spaceweather.com/eclipses/01aug08b/Anthony-Ayiomamitis2.jpg

SAME DAY, SAME SECOND, Institute of Nuclear Physics, Russia, Novosibirsk, VERY DIFFERENT IMAGES, NO SHADOWS WHATSOEVER ON THIS ONE. HERE IS THE EQUIPMENT USED BY THE AUTHOR:

Equipment:
Takahashi FSQ 106/f5
Celestron CG3/EQ2 GEM
Canon EOS 350D XT
Baader ND-5 (full-aperture)





http://www.native-science.net/images/image142.earthplace.02.jpg
http://www.native-science.net/images/image144.earthplace.04.finn.jpg
http://www.native-science.net/images/image143.earthplace.03.jpg

Ancient depictions of the northern circumpolar constellations orbits, separate from the regular ones.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2009, 04:42:09 AM by levee »
Logged
?

dyno

  • 562
  • +0/-0
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #56 on: June 09, 2009, 04:47:12 AM »
How have you come to the conclusion that all those different images were the same? They look nothing alike.

Fast exposures will not show details of the moon. Long exposures will but will have a washed out corona. Combining short and long allows details from the moon for aesthetic reasons.

Some telescopes will have a plate specifically to obscure the sun creating a black disk on the image.

You've proved you don't know what you are talking about.
Logged
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-40
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #57 on: June 09, 2009, 04:50:26 AM »
dyno, listen ***...your comments do not address the fact that the original 1999 photos were enhanced by that Nasa official to show those shadows; plates were not used on all pictures...of course they were taken by three different people, you numskulls, that was my point; they show nothing of the features claimed by Luethen.

Here is how Hartwig Luethen, the author of the 2008 picture describes his digital imaging:

Back home the images are grabbed using the timer controlled mode of the excellent Giotto freeware. I used Fitswork  (also freeware) for stacking the images.  

The video frames were stacked using Marc Vornhusen's experimental Sky Patrol software-

http://www.alice-dsl.net/h.luethen/mintron/MintronE.htm

« Last Edit: June 09, 2009, 04:56:33 AM by levee »
Logged
?

dyno

  • 562
  • +0/-0
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #58 on: June 09, 2009, 05:01:24 AM »
Come now, personal insults paint you poorly.

By shadows I assume you are talking about the coronal detail.
The two Russian jobs don't have the same details because the second guy missed totality. He fast exposures didn't allow enough light to be captured to make out the corona.
The 1999 photos will look different because the coronal wind is dynamic.
Some images are cropped closely because people are interested in looking at surface prominants. Different exposures are made for different reasons. Of course they won't look the same.

Logged
*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7272
  • +7/-40
Re: "Star-trails"
« Reply #59 on: June 09, 2009, 05:05:08 AM »
I have deleted the insults from my message.

Let us look again at the picture made by the Nasa official.



The above picture is a combination of twenty-two photographs that were digitally processed to highlight faint features of a total eclipe that occurred in August of 1999. The outer pictures of the Sun's corona were digitally altered to enhance dim, outlying waves and filaments. The inner pictures of the usually dark Moon were enhanced to bring out its faint glow from doubly reflected sunlight.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW DYNO?

HE DIGITALLY ENHANCED THE USUALLY DARK FEATURES, TO SHOW WHAT IS NOT THERE IN THE ORIGINAL PICTURE: NAMELY MOON SHADOWS.

THAT IS WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY HERE.

The equipment used at the Institute of Physics was certainly superior to that used by Luethen, who digitally modifies his pictures at home, using diverse software.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
« previous next »