What's wrong with this picture?

John Savard wrote:

That's not true. The sun is shining from the right on both the Earth in
the background, and the lunar mountains to the left. It's only shining
on the *astronaut* from the opposite direction.




Look at the two spaceships also; in fact, given the way it's hitting the
Earth, the whole scene should maybe be in darkness.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


John Savard wrote:

That's not true. The sun is shining from the right on both the Earth in
the background, and the lunar mountains to the left. It's only shining
on the *astronaut* from the opposite direction.




Look at the two spaceships also; in fact, given the way it's hitting the
Earth, the whole scene should maybe be in darkness.

To be fair:

ftp://ftp.seds.org/pub/images/apollo...o-11-patch.jpg

got it wrong too.



Pat

On 2004-08-28, Fox2 wrote:

SiFi space suits started out as pressurized diving suits.
-Then became armored like a 12th century knight with jet packs.
-Then back to pressurized diving suits.
-Then to skin tight, transparent plastics that held sea level
pressures, but maintained full flexibility.
-Then back to pressurized diving suits.

Current space suits have never made it past the
pressurized diving suit stage.

There was a sf story where - this is probably a spoiler, but since I
can't remember what the hell it was... - a gimmick involved the society
being post-technical, having devolved back to about Rennaisance levels,
but with occasional old artifacts around; it became apparent at one
point that a building was, in fact, an abandoned spaceship, for example.

There was a reference, at one point, to an ancient picture, showing a
knight in armour on a desolate rocky plain, with a strangely coloured
full moon over his shoulder...

--
-Andrew Gray

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:27:12 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote, in part:

Look at the two spaceships also; in fact, given the way it's hitting the
Earth, the whole scene should maybe be in darkness.

That's it, then! It *is* night on that part of the Moon, so the
illumination on the Moon is coming from lights on another spaceship
behind the viewer of the painting.

John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html

John Savard wrote:

That's it, then! It *is* night on that part of the Moon, so the
illumination on the Moon is coming from lights on another spaceship
behind the viewer of the painting.

John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html


If it were reddish-yellow light, I would suspect it was another one of
those lava-filled craters like the one to the left of the ship in full
eruption.

Pat

On or about Sun, 29 Aug 2004 13:35:42 GMT, John Savard made the sensational claim that:
On Sat, 28 Aug 2004 18:27:12 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote, in part:

Look at the two spaceships also; in fact, given the way it's hitting the
Earth, the whole scene should maybe be in darkness.

That's it, then! It *is* night on that part of the Moon, so the
illumination on the Moon is coming from lights on another spaceship
behind the viewer of the painting.

Or maybe it's just a drawing. :-P
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | Just because something
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | is possible, doesn't
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | mean it can happen

In article , Andrew Gray
wrote:

On 2004-08-28, Fox2 wrote:

SiFi space suits started out as pressurized diving suits.
-Then became armored like a 12th century knight with jet packs.
-Then back to pressurized diving suits.
-Then to skin tight, transparent plastics that held sea level
pressures, but maintained full flexibility.
-Then back to pressurized diving suits.

Current space suits have never made it past the
pressurized diving suit stage.

There was a sf story where - this is probably a spoiler, but since I
can't remember what the hell it was... - a gimmick involved the society
being post-technical, having devolved back to about Rennaisance levels,
but with occasional old artifacts around; it became apparent at one
point that a building was, in fact, an abandoned spaceship, for example.

There was a reference, at one point, to an ancient picture, showing a
knight in armour on a desolate rocky plain, with a strangely coloured
full moon over his shoulder...

Gene Wolfe's Book Of The New Sun (four volumes starting with
_The_Shadow_of_the_Torturer_).

That's not really a spoiler.

--
David M. Palmer (formerly @clark.net, @ematic.com)

On Sun, 29 Aug 2004 22:12:08 GMT, LooseChanj wrote,
in part:

Or maybe it's just a drawing. :-P

It *is* just a painting.

But the question is - are there mistakes in it?

A mistake in a painting is a failure to correspond with what may exist
in the real world. (Well, in the case of a representational painting,
anyways; Jackson Pollack, Piet Mondrian, or even Pablo Picasso
excepted... for that matter, even M. C. Escher...)

Thus, if objects are illuminated from different directions, one must
ask: are multiple light sources plausible?

John Savard
http://home.ecn.ab.ca/~jsavard/index.html

Pat Flannery wrote:
Other than the immediate response of "Lots!", try to list _all_ the
little problems inherent in it:
http://sun3.lib.uci.edu/~jsisson/gifs/spacema.gif
Starting with choosing CO2 as your breathing gas, and the fact that the
Sun shines on the Moon from a different direction than it does on Earth. :-D

Pat


The terminator should be half of an ellipse whose semi-major axis is the
same as the planet disk's radius. The minor axis of the ellipse should
point towards the light source.

http://clowder.net/hop/Terminator.jpg

I remember in grade school drawing planet earths with the American
continents and maybe even some city lights as shown in the comic book
cover. Then I was amazed by photos showing all the clouds. Now it seems
obvious that much of earth's surface would be hidden by clouds.

Are there any pre earth photo illustrations that accurately portray the
earth with clouds?

--
Hop David
http://clowder.net/hop/index.html

John Savard wrote:


Thus, if objects are illuminated from different directions, one must
ask: are multiple light sources plausible?


Leaving the lighting aside (though the ghost of Chesley Bonestell would
be appalled), what exactly is the other ship with the EVA'ing astronaut
doing hanging in the sky a few dozen feet up? I could see how it could
be artistic license meant to portray two different events in one
painting...but the two astronauts seem to be acknowledging each other's
proximity, which implies that it really is supposed to be that close to
the person on the surface; if it's in orbit, then this scene must be
occurring at the highest point on the lunar surface, and the crew of the
orbiting spacecraft be very confident in their understanding of lunar
topography and elevations....one has to admit that having something go
flying a few dozen feet overhead at lunar orbital velocity would be
impressive to see, provided one knew where to look so as not to miss it.
One would also hope that the EVA'ng astronaut's umbilical was kept to a
length that would allow him not to have to worry about hitting a
mountain peak if he went as far down as he could get with it.
Of course, the one thing you notice right off the bat when you look at
the picture is that knife the astronaut on the surface is equipped
with...it looks oddly incongruous in this setting, sort of like the way
a mouse would look sitting on George Washington's head in a presidential
portrait....there is no reason a mouse _couldn't_ sit on George
Washington's head; it's just that you wouldn't expect to see it in a
painting of him (unless the painting was by Grant Wood...I'm still
snickering about this little gem of surrealism:
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~MA98/hav...ages/weems.jpg).
Then there is the deep mystery of why the astronaut is carrying the
oxygen mask around on the Moon's surface, knowing full well there is no
way he can put it on anyone he meets without making them raise the visor
of their spacesuit and killing them in the process of trying to give
them oxygen to save them from some crisis...probably a danger of
suffocation from their failure to learn how to breathe CO2, the way he has.
What makes the painting so interesting to me is that there is nothing
_obvious_ in what's not right with it- it's like one of those cartoons
in Junior Scholastic magazine that challenges you to find twelve things
wrong in the picture...you start with the knife, and work out from there
in an exercise in lunar logic.
Lileks.com did an investigation into the strange Art Frahm pin-up
painting celery/falling panties fetish in somewhat the same regard:
http://www.lileks.com/institute/frahm/index.html

Pat