4 ms·

> I don't think the top one could be an overexposed earth because we're obviously looking at the earth's dark side It's Earth. Venus is also visible as small d

• verisimi 2y ago
  No stars though.
  • taberiand 2y ago
    You don't usually see stars during the day
    • ben_w 2y ago
      Because of the atmosphere diffuses all the blue from the sunlight all over the place. I've seen people demonstrate that if you know where to point a telescope, it is just about possible to make out some of the brighter objects — though I can't remember if that was a star or a planet… But in this case, the exposure is set at a level that even Venus isn't quite fully saturating the sensor.
      • taberiand 2y ago
        On the moon, the sunlight bouncing around is still enough to outshine the stars
      • crazygringo 2y ago
        Yup, it's less to do with atmosphere and more with exposure. Shots of stars at night have exposures of a few seconds to get them to appear. Shots in the daytime are more like 1/60 sec.
    • verisimi 2y ago
      Nor do you see Venus.
• crazygringo 2y ago
  It can't be though. It's earth's dark side. It couldn't be bright like that -- it's not physically possible, right? At best it would be a sliver of a crescent. Also, in the other photo, there's a dark circular object partially obscuring. That would have to be earth, no? Obscuring the sun, which means the object on the horizon is... lens flare even brighter than the sun, or something? Do people here understand my confusion? I'm not convinced the captions are accurate, because they seem to contradict what's physically possible.
  • tialaramex 2y ago
    > the object on the horizon is... lens flare even brighter than the sun, or something? This is a photo of sunset. The nature of sunset ought to be pretty easy to understand, from the point of view of the camera on a large object, the Sun seems to go behind the object and then it can't see the Sun any more, and we call this "setting". So no, the object on the horizon is the Sun, it's incredibly bright. I expect the problem is like with that "3.6 Roentgen, not great, not terrible" meme, you're assuming that a device (the camera) is giving you correct information but it was maxed out instead. The Earth looks bright from the Moon, as the Moon does to us. So lets call that 100% bright. Now the Sun is several hundred thousand times brighter. That's um... oh, it's 100% bright again, because we've maxed out the device.
    • crazygringo 2y ago
      > The Earth looks bright from the Moon, as the Moon does to us. So lets call that 100% bright. No it doesn't, because as I've stated twice, it's the dark side of the earth we're seeing, because the sun is behind it. It's more like 1% bright, as compared to the moon's visible illuminated surface. Think how bright the dark part of a thin crescent moon is. That's how bright the earth is going to be in this picture. Close to black, except for maybe a sliver of a crescent similar in brightness to the moon's surface. So again -- this photo makes no sense. Unless one of the two objects is just lens flare, or there's another kind of artifact.
      • bodhi_mind 2y ago