3 ms·

Before Lightroom it might have looked closer to this: https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e000193/art002e000193~large.jpg https://images-assets.nasa.gov/

by layer8 7mo ago

Before Lightroom it might have looked closer to this: https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e000193/art002e000193~large.jpg https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e000193/art002e00...

consumer451 7mo ago
Might I ask, what was your path to finding this image?
- rafram 7mo ago
  https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/journey-to-the-moon/ https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/journey-to-the-moon/
  - consumer451 7mo ago
    Thanks so much. Sending this link to my nerdy nephews immediately.
hannesfur 7mo ago
From the EXIF we can infer that every setting was left at the default. No exposure comp, no contrast, no HSL, no lens correction and a linear tone curve. Just the default Adobe Color profile at 5400K.
ranie93 7mo ago
Maybe it’s because I (like many) have experienced taking pictures at night and seeing the grainy result that _this_ image struck me as incredibly realistic. Almost like I ran the grainy-to-real conversion in my mind and I felt like I was imagining seeing this in person. Beautiful image!
divbzero 7mo ago
The photograph appears to show nightime on Earth with just a sliver of daytime. Beyond cities in Iberia and along the coast of Africa, most of what we can see would be reflected light from the Moon? We are just past full moon on April 1.
- hparadiz 7mo ago
  1/4 exposure time so 250 ms of light. the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon, plus the sun's rays refracting through the atmosphere which happens even at night. The natural blue light is coming from the oxygen in the atmosphere but it's so overwhelming in that spot that it turns the light pure white. The red/orangish is coming from particulates and the green/red from aurora. My favorite part I think is the very bottom where you can see the blue light taper off and not overwhelm the camera sensor and you can see the aurora with it. I love this photo so much. Probably my favorite photo ever now.
  - pdonis 7mo ago
    > the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon And all the others are negligible by many orders of magnitude compared to the moon. So it's really just the moon as far as this photo is concerned (except for the small sliver that's still illuminated by sunlight, including refracted sunlight).
  - vasco 7mo ago
    > the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, That's highly incorrect. I have many lightsources that aren't contributing to any photons in that picture. For example my refrigerator light.
    - Y-bar 7mo ago
      I turn off my refrigerator light after I close the door by reaching in and pushing the button. Don’t you?
  - functional_dev 7mo ago
    so the atmosphere acts as giant lamp lit from behind by Moon? never thought of it that way
  - tantalor 7mo ago
    > the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon This is true for every photo ever taken
deepsun 7mo ago
But that one (art002e000193~large.jpg) is only 287kB. The Lightroom-processed one is 6.2MB. I would expect original to be heavier.
- porphyra 7mo ago
  The Lightroom one was processed from raw. Also, by brightening it a lot, the noisy high-ISO grain becomes more apparent. Noise is famously incompressible, so it leads to a much larger file size.
  - thfuran 7mo ago
    Brightening the image may make the iso noise easier to see, but it doesn't create it.
    - porphyra 7mo ago
      Noise that's easier to see will not be compressed away by the JPEG compression. JPEG is basically just DCT + thresholding. Any higher amplitude noise is going to stay and increase the final file size. Also, pulling more data from your 14 bit or 16 bit raws results in more noise in the end compared to the straight-out-of-camera 8 bit JPEGs.
    - miduil 7mo ago
      But lossy-codecs job is to utilize psychovisual tricks to discard as much high-frequency information as possible, whilst remaining similar visual effects. If you increase the brightness in RAW and then re-encode the JPEG - more noise is being pulled up in the visual spectrum, therefor less of that information (filesize) is discarded. For example, if you render Gaussian noise in photopea and export as JPEG 100% quality, it has 9.2MB. If you reduce the exposure by -2 it goes down to 7.8MB. That's partially because more parts of the noise are effectively black pixels, but also I believe because of the earlier mentioned effect.
    - godelski 7mo ago
      It's not lossless
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
fortyseven 7mo ago
It's beautiful as these all are, that one is probably my favorite. And as somebody else said it kind of feels more real seeing the grain like that. It's just beautiful. A side we never see quite like this.
jnpnj 7mo ago
Made me look for the first pictures of earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_images_of_Earth_from_space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_images_of_Ea... - first video listed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1946-11-21_White_Sands_NM_V-2_rocket.ogg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1946-11-21_White_Sands_NM... quite amazing

by layer8 7mo ago

Before Lightroom it might have looked closer to this: https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e000193/art002e000193~large.jpg https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e000193/art002e00...

consumer451 7mo ago

Might I ask, what was your path to finding this image?

rafram 7mo ago
https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/journey-to-the-moon/ https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/journey-to-the-moon/
- consumer451 7mo ago
  Thanks so much. Sending this link to my nerdy nephews immediately.

hannesfur 7mo ago

From the EXIF we can infer that every setting was left at the default. No exposure comp, no contrast, no HSL, no lens correction and a linear tone curve. Just the default Adobe Color profile at 5400K.

ranie93 7mo ago

Maybe it’s because I (like many) have experienced taking pictures at night and seeing the grainy result that _this_ image struck me as incredibly realistic. Almost like I ran the grainy-to-real conversion in my mind and I felt like I was imagining seeing this in person. Beautiful image!

divbzero 7mo ago

The photograph appears to show nightime on Earth with just a sliver of daytime. Beyond cities in Iberia and along the coast of Africa, most of what we can see would be reflected light from the Moon? We are just past full moon on April 1.

hparadiz 7mo ago
1/4 exposure time so 250 ms of light. the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon, plus the sun's rays refracting through the atmosphere which happens even at night. The natural blue light is coming from the oxygen in the atmosphere but it's so overwhelming in that spot that it turns the light pure white. The red/orangish is coming from particulates and the green/red from aurora. My favorite part I think is the very bottom where you can see the blue light taper off and not overwhelm the camera sensor and you can see the aurora with it. I love this photo so much. Probably my favorite photo ever now.
- pdonis 7mo ago
  > the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon And all the others are negligible by many orders of magnitude compared to the moon. So it's really just the moon as far as this photo is concerned (except for the small sliver that's still illuminated by sunlight, including refracted sunlight).
- vasco 7mo ago
  > the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, That's highly incorrect. I have many lightsources that aren't contributing to any photons in that picture. For example my refrigerator light.
  - Y-bar 7mo ago
    I turn off my refrigerator light after I close the door by reaching in and pushing the button. Don’t you?
- functional_dev 7mo ago
  so the atmosphere acts as giant lamp lit from behind by Moon? never thought of it that way
- tantalor 7mo ago
  > the light is coming from all the light sources in the universe, plus the moon This is true for every photo ever taken

deepsun 7mo ago

But that one (art002e000193~large.jpg) is only 287kB. The Lightroom-processed one is 6.2MB. I would expect original to be heavier.

porphyra 7mo ago
The Lightroom one was processed from raw. Also, by brightening it a lot, the noisy high-ISO grain becomes more apparent. Noise is famously incompressible, so it leads to a much larger file size.
- thfuran 7mo ago
  Brightening the image may make the iso noise easier to see, but it doesn't create it.
  - porphyra 7mo ago
    Noise that's easier to see will not be compressed away by the JPEG compression. JPEG is basically just DCT + thresholding. Any higher amplitude noise is going to stay and increase the final file size. Also, pulling more data from your 14 bit or 16 bit raws results in more noise in the end compared to the straight-out-of-camera 8 bit JPEGs.
  - miduil 7mo ago
    But lossy-codecs job is to utilize psychovisual tricks to discard as much high-frequency information as possible, whilst remaining similar visual effects. If you increase the brightness in RAW and then re-encode the JPEG - more noise is being pulled up in the visual spectrum, therefor less of that information (filesize) is discarded. For example, if you render Gaussian noise in photopea and export as JPEG 100% quality, it has 9.2MB. If you reduce the exposure by -2 it goes down to 7.8MB. That's partially because more parts of the noise are effectively black pixels, but also I believe because of the earlier mentioned effect.
  - godelski 7mo ago
    It's not lossless

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

fortyseven 7mo ago

It's beautiful as these all are, that one is probably my favorite. And as somebody else said it kind of feels more real seeing the grain like that. It's just beautiful. A side we never see quite like this.

jnpnj 7mo ago

Made me look for the first pictures of earth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_images_of_Earth_from_space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_images_of_Ea... - first video listed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1946-11-21_White_Sands_NM_V-2_rocket.ogg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1946-11-21_White_Sands_NM... quite amazing