4 ms·

The moon in front of clouds... that is all you need to know right there. It is an aesthetically beautiful photo, but it seems difficult to appreciate once that

The moon in front of clouds... that is all you need to know right there. It is an aesthetically beautiful photo, but it seems difficult to appreciate once that feature is noticed. Early scientists in the pre-telescope era (I forget who), actually used the fact that clouds only appear in front of the moon to determine that it was a distant object.

gagege 9y ago
I think it's important to note that the clouds are behind and in front of the moon. I suppose some clouds could look like they were behind the moon if they are thin enough and the moon bright enough to punch through them.
- ghaff 9y ago
  It's a stretch. Some of those clouds that look behind the moon look as if they're thick enough that they'd visibly affect the look of the moon if they were actually in front. Of course, that itself could have been manipulated to be invisible. That photo screams heavy manipulation to me. But then Lik is one of those nature photographers with the big galleries whose photos I find technically impressive but I don't really love them for the most part. They're too in my face.
- gmiller123456 9y ago
  Not sure why your comment got downvoted. It's wrong, but raises a good point not previously addressed. Clouds can be thin enough so that their presence is undetectable against the "noisy" surface of the Moon. But that's not what's going on in this photo for two reasons. 1) The clouds are obviously too thick, and 2) the clouds would be illuminated by the Moon, with the brightness falling off exponentially further from the Moon. Also, the Moon's illumination would be the same color as the Moon (barring light pollution).
  - gagege 9y ago
    Yeah, I wasn't saying I think the photo is real, just that the clouds looking like they're behind the moon isn't such a telltale sign that it is fake.
  - ksk 9y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4
NelsonMinar 9y ago
The article is a bit odd in acknowledging this fact and then saying he's going to ignore it "for the sake of the argument". I guess he wanted to document all the other tells, too.
ksk 9y ago
>The moon in front of clouds... that is all you need to know right there. Well that is entirely possible. I would say that's the least of the problems with the picture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4
- eridius 9y ago
  In the video you linked, the brightness/aperture has been jacked up so much that the moon appears to be blindingly white. This just makes it blow out the wispy clouds in front of it so you can't see the clouds. This effect is clearly not possible for a normal moon.
  - ksk 9y ago
    Okay, Here are some non-blindly-white moons. https://www.flickr.com/photos/rinathompsonphotography/8407008251/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/rinathompsonphotography/840700... https://www.flickr.com/photos/backyardastronomyguy/33808068472/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/backyardastronomyguy/338080684... https://www.flickr.com/photos/bpotu/15309316569/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/bpotu/15309316569/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffmaack/14693912932/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffmaack/14693912932/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/encouragement/14442442441/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/encouragement/14442442441/ I think people are just asserting what is and isn't possible without stopping to consider that they could be wrong. Whether the original photo is or isn't a composite, I don't know. Even as an amateur photographer, I do know that a non composite photo is possible that will look very close to the original.
    - eridius 9y ago
      Every single photo you linked to, the clouds are visible over the moon. It can be subtle, sure, since you end up with very wispy clouds that have a similar color to the moon, but the clouds are still clearly affecting the appearance of the moon. The bpotu photo is the one that looks the most like the moon is over clouds, but I think that's just because the right side of the moon is so bright and the clouds there are so thin. But even there it does appear to be very slight discoloration caused by the clouds intersecting the moon.

gagege 9y ago

I think it's important to note that the clouds are behind and in front of the moon. I suppose some clouds could look like they were behind the moon if they are thin enough and the moon bright enough to punch through them.

ghaff 9y ago
It's a stretch. Some of those clouds that look behind the moon look as if they're thick enough that they'd visibly affect the look of the moon if they were actually in front. Of course, that itself could have been manipulated to be invisible. That photo screams heavy manipulation to me. But then Lik is one of those nature photographers with the big galleries whose photos I find technically impressive but I don't really love them for the most part. They're too in my face.
gmiller123456 9y ago
Not sure why your comment got downvoted. It's wrong, but raises a good point not previously addressed. Clouds can be thin enough so that their presence is undetectable against the "noisy" surface of the Moon. But that's not what's going on in this photo for two reasons. 1) The clouds are obviously too thick, and 2) the clouds would be illuminated by the Moon, with the brightness falling off exponentially further from the Moon. Also, the Moon's illumination would be the same color as the Moon (barring light pollution).
- gagege 9y ago
  Yeah, I wasn't saying I think the photo is real, just that the clouds looking like they're behind the moon isn't such a telltale sign that it is fake.
- ksk 9y ago
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4

NelsonMinar 9y ago

The article is a bit odd in acknowledging this fact and then saying he's going to ignore it "for the sake of the argument". I guess he wanted to document all the other tells, too.

ksk 9y ago

>The moon in front of clouds... that is all you need to know right there. Well that is entirely possible. I would say that's the least of the problems with the picture. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdojiTkJi_4

eridius 9y ago
In the video you linked, the brightness/aperture has been jacked up so much that the moon appears to be blindingly white. This just makes it blow out the wispy clouds in front of it so you can't see the clouds. This effect is clearly not possible for a normal moon.
- ksk 9y ago
  Okay, Here are some non-blindly-white moons. https://www.flickr.com/photos/rinathompsonphotography/8407008251/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/rinathompsonphotography/840700... https://www.flickr.com/photos/backyardastronomyguy/33808068472/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/backyardastronomyguy/338080684... https://www.flickr.com/photos/bpotu/15309316569/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/bpotu/15309316569/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffmaack/14693912932/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffmaack/14693912932/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/encouragement/14442442441/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/encouragement/14442442441/ I think people are just asserting what is and isn't possible without stopping to consider that they could be wrong. Whether the original photo is or isn't a composite, I don't know. Even as an amateur photographer, I do know that a non composite photo is possible that will look very close to the original.
  - eridius 9y ago
    Every single photo you linked to, the clouds are visible over the moon. It can be subtle, sure, since you end up with very wispy clouds that have a similar color to the moon, but the clouds are still clearly affecting the appearance of the moon. The bpotu photo is the one that looks the most like the moon is over clouds, but I think that's just because the right side of the moon is so bright and the clouds there are so thin. But even there it does appear to be very slight discoloration caused by the clouds intersecting the moon.