Dec 07 APOD Discussion right here

MooEy · Post by **MooEy** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 12:12 am

come to think of it, it's either fraud or a very predictable event. maybe a missile test site where jets just fire their missiles into the sea. how that pic get to apod is beyond me.

~MooEy~

AGMI · Post by **AGMI** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 10:27 am

still find it hard to believe its an insect flying past the lens

could've been an insect CRAWLING across the lens?! like ants? after all...the lens might be smalll

wei · Post by **wei** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 11:12 am

then the insect would have been crawing at an incredible speed :?:

MooEy · Post by **MooEy** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 11:44 am

nah, things dun work that way. a insect crawling needs to crawl at an amazing speed, prolly 2-4cm in that 1/125 sec. also, it will not be in focus, thus the trail left behind will not be a thin streak. lastly, it needs to be amazingly bright to actually leave a trail on the film/sensor.

"there is strong evidence that the image is genuine." i can always print out the photoshoped pic and shoot it again with a digicam, that way i will have a valid exif.

~MooEy~

carlogambino · Post by **carlogambino** » Fri Dec 24, 2004 3:41 pm

Hi, i think then it wouldnt have "nearly identical signal-to-noise values across common areas". Besides, we all know that the photographer sweared that it was not doctored(though it looks so), which was why it went into APOD in the first place.

A 5 YeaR Old · Post by **A 5 YeaR Old** » Mon Dec 27, 2004 7:28 pm

i stick to believing that its a fraud