On Sep 21, 12:39*am, (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
My camera has a choice of "white balance" settings. *If I use "Sunlight"
on the assumption that the moon is a sunlight landscape, photos of the
moon come out looking a little brownish. *If I use "Auto", the moon
appears nearly colorless. *The former coloration is not implausible,
but which is closer to the truth?

Fortunately, I can make this decision retroactively for photos shot
in RAW mode.

--
"Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS
crashed the stock market, wiped out half of our 401Ks, took trillions in
TARP money, spilled oil in the Gulf of Mexico, gave themselves billions in
bonuses, and paid no taxes? Yeah, me neither."

How exactly did our naked and physically dark moon become so unusually
monochromatic, reflective and inert?

The moon is not actually monochromatic nor inert:
Moon’s natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural
minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as
only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation
cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.
http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg
http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43

Oddly the NASA/Apollo era and their rad-hard Kodak version of our
physically dark and paramagnetic moon is apparently the one and only
off-world location that becomes more inert as well as more reflective
and monochromatic by the closer you get to it, and any planet other
than Earth simply can’t be recorded within the same FOV as having the
horizon of that naked moon (regardless of the FOV direction or use of
any given lens, as well as not even possible when using the world’s
best film and optics along with a polarized optical filter to reduce
the local surface glare doesn’t seem to help).

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”