5 ms·
> For starters, in real life, there is visible light pollution in several directions around the forest and none of this is visible here on the horizon. It seem
by leereeves 8y ago
> For starters, in real life, there is visible light pollution in several directions around the forest and none of this is visible here on the horizon.
It seems like in many of the pictures, including the one above this quote, the horizon is much lighter than the sky above. Isn't that light pollution?
> You can perhaps recognize...the bright star Vega and Polaris, which would be located above the frame.
How do we recognize those? The arrow to "Polaris" is pointing out of the picture. And how was the bright dot in the picture identified as "Vega"?
- GraemeL 8y agoVega is pointed out because in relation to the galaxy in the picture it allows the author to locate where Polaris should be (above the frame). Polaris being above the frame is a problem because it is never above the horizon where the photograph is supposed to have been taken.
- leereeves 8y agoI get that, but if that bright dot isn't Vega, then the argument falls apart. How do we know it's Vega?
- michelpp 8y agoFrom the article "The night sky offers an unlimited source of markers (e.g. stars, constellations, Milky Way, etc.) that never lie about the time of year and location in the world you shot a night sky picture from." The key word is unlimited. Vega is correctly identified by the many stars around it that are in turn correctly identified by the many professional astronomers and astro-photographers discussing these very pictures. The photo mentions polaris to point out the absurdity of the north star being in the sky of a picture taken in the southern hemisphere.
- leereeves 8y agoThat's an argument from authority without even establishing the authority in question. Evidence, please. Edit: Well, that's a lot of downvotes. So you all see the pattern? Why not point it out? Or are you merely accepting this blog post without question?
- FPGAhacker 8y agoSo you don't believe Vega can be identified by the pattern of star visible around it?
- leereeves 8y agoI believe that if it's correct, the pattern can easily be pointed out and verified. But a mere claim without evidence, I question.
- metaphor 8y agoThe pattern was clearly pointed out in the article: > You can perhaps recognize NGC 7000 (North American, Pelican nebulae, Sadr region)... Keyword: perhaps...everything else was redundant prose.
- Thorrez 8y agoFrom the article: >About the author: Adrien Mauduit is a professional astrophotographer and cinematographer and the CEO and owner of Night Lights Films. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. Mauduit also does science education, communication, and public outreach for Project PoSSUM. You can find more of Mauduit’s work Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.
- leereeves 8y agoFrom the comment I replied to: > the many professional astronomers and astro-photographers discussing these very pictures That's what I was talking about. Even if we're just talking about the author, and you accept those qualifications, it's still an argument from authority without evidence.
- empath75 8y agoWell you can look at the picture and look at any star chart and compare them. It doesn’t take specialized knowledge to do this.
- leereeves 8y agoI did. I found Vega in Stellarium. I see Polaris, the Milky Way, and the dippers in Stellarium. I don't see any pattern that matches the claim made by this blog post. But I'm no expert, so I'm asking for a clear demonstration of the evidence the author sees.
- nsilvestri 8y agoServices like http://nova.astrometry.net/ http://nova.astrometry.net/ provide celestial location data of any image of the night sky. Plug the image into it and check that it is indeed Vega.