2 ms·

Some of those can be seen with naked eye. Others are taken with longer exposure times (and using tracers (or multiple shots) to avoid this http://www.twanight.o

by rplnt 14y ago

Some of those can be seen with naked eye. Others are taken with longer exposure times (and using tracers (or multiple shots) to avoid this http://www.twanight.org/newTWAN/photos/3003666.jpg http://www.twanight.org/newTWAN/photos/3003666.jpg ). While we can call them fake, they are not fake in a sense that they don't capture the real thing.

aaron695 14y ago
There's probably 10,000 stars in the first photo that's supposed to be part of the night sky? It implies if the lights go out you'd see around 100,000 stars. In real life you can see 2000 in the total night sky away from lights. How will a long exposure allow you to see more stars? Even in the jpg you link you can see there's obviously one to two thousand stars tops in it. These pictures are from telescopes, the latter ones even have fake colors applied.
- rplnt 14y ago
  > There's probably 10,000 stars in the first photo that's supposed to be part of the night sky? The first (or fourth) photo seems to me like naked eye would see. > In real life you can see 2000 in the total night sky away from lights. You can see much more than that. Just the fact that you can see Milky Way can give it away (although you can't see individual stars, they are still stars) > How will a long exposure allow you to see more stars? The less bright ones, that you can't see with naked eye, will appear. Just take any regular camera, go out and take a 20s photo of the night sky. You'll see how much more stars you'll see. Yes, some of the pictures are zoomed in quite a lot, and I don't think they are colored though.
  - aaron695 14y ago
    Interesting I assumed the colours from star pictures are mostly faked / enhanced / thickened / filtered. I'll have to look into it more.
- ra 14y ago
  Dude, they're not from telescopes and they're not 'fake' colours. Night sky images are produced by 'stacking' a large number of 1-2 second exposures on top of each other with software. This has the effect of intensifying light (making dim stars brighter) and increasing the intensity of the milky way (yes, those colours are true) without creating star trails (10 seconds is too long). To see this with the naked eye you need to spend at least 20 minutes outside in complete darkness to let your eyes adjust. You need no moon, no torch, no street lights, no light pollution. Only then can you see the nebulosity of the Milky Way (colors), and you will see literally 10-100,000 stars (not including other galaxies, the LMC or SMC). For some great examples of night sky photography see: http://500px.com/AaronGroen http://500px.com/AaronGroen

by rplnt 14y ago

aaron695 14y ago

There's probably 10,000 stars in the first photo that's supposed to be part of the night sky? It implies if the lights go out you'd see around 100,000 stars. In real life you can see 2000 in the total night sky away from lights. How will a long exposure allow you to see more stars? Even in the jpg you link you can see there's obviously one to two thousand stars tops in it. These pictures are from telescopes, the latter ones even have fake colors applied.

rplnt 14y ago
> There's probably 10,000 stars in the first photo that's supposed to be part of the night sky? The first (or fourth) photo seems to me like naked eye would see. > In real life you can see 2000 in the total night sky away from lights. You can see much more than that. Just the fact that you can see Milky Way can give it away (although you can't see individual stars, they are still stars) > How will a long exposure allow you to see more stars? The less bright ones, that you can't see with naked eye, will appear. Just take any regular camera, go out and take a 20s photo of the night sky. You'll see how much more stars you'll see. Yes, some of the pictures are zoomed in quite a lot, and I don't think they are colored though.
- aaron695 14y ago
  Interesting I assumed the colours from star pictures are mostly faked / enhanced / thickened / filtered. I'll have to look into it more.
ra 14y ago
Dude, they're not from telescopes and they're not 'fake' colours. Night sky images are produced by 'stacking' a large number of 1-2 second exposures on top of each other with software. This has the effect of intensifying light (making dim stars brighter) and increasing the intensity of the milky way (yes, those colours are true) without creating star trails (10 seconds is too long). To see this with the naked eye you need to spend at least 20 minutes outside in complete darkness to let your eyes adjust. You need no moon, no torch, no street lights, no light pollution. Only then can you see the nebulosity of the Milky Way (colors), and you will see literally 10-100,000 stars (not including other galaxies, the LMC or SMC). For some great examples of night sky photography see: http://500px.com/AaronGroen http://500px.com/AaronGroen