Interesting photo...

Am Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:16:28 +0100 schrieb Graham W:

Michael Weber wrote:
Am Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:00:10 GMT schrieb Marcus Fox:

"Boo" wrote in message
.. .
Marcus Fox wrote:
On 6th July around 12:30, I took a photo of the moon, on a long
exposure and a narrow aperture. My location at the time was about 27
N and 15 W (Canary Islands). When I looked at the photo I saw an
interesting object above the moon and slightly to the right. Can
someone with astronomy planetarium software check what it is?

Jupiter ? What did it look like ? How far above and to the right ?

About three times the distance above as it was to the right. It was
brighter than any other object, apart from the moon. Certainly looks
like Jupiter, just didn't think I could pick out that much detail with
only a Canon A80. Oh, and I meant wide aperture in my first post.

http://www.geocities.com/marcusfox/IMG_1564.JPG

Marcus

Huh,
That seems to be a reflection at the lenses in your camera. Its
definetly not an astronomical object, its too big for that.

Nope, it is Jupiter,

Huh, at this size and Brightness?

the band across the middle is at the correct angle.
Just a pity that the Jovian moons don't show. Callisto is close by at
the left hand side of the band.

plz. correct me, but Jovian Moons??? - U R just joking?


Gruß aus Hanover/Germany

Nope, it is Jupiter, the band across the middle is at the correct
angle. Just a pity that the Jovian moons don't show. Callisto is close
by at the left hand side of the band.

I think you are mistaken here...

To clarify: by that I meant I think you are mistaken to think that that
image is an image of the *disc* of the planet; For why else mention the
"band across the middle" and it being a pity one of the Galillean satellites
are not visible?

[discussion follows]

All of which is true if the image was critically focussed. But it is
really
out of focus.

Then to reiterate my point above, why mention the banding as evidence that
it is Jupiter, which on a normal reading one takes to mean its a feature of
the planet's disc, and of not seeing one of the Moon's that would imply its
in focus? If by that banding, you now do not mean banding from the image in
focus, what else are we meant to imply from that?

Have a look at the wires and their bits of binding twine
and the shrubbs at the right.

Yes I saw the wires, and the plants, in the bottom right too, but seeing the
wires does not necessarily mean the image is out of focus: the lens on that
camera is 7.8mm-23.4mm so the realtively speaking large depth of focus may
be a factor here too. And more so if a small aperture was used.

This is not to say the image is not an image of Jupiter, it may well be.
But if it is, it is not an image of the true disc of the planet imaged
with the A80 without additionally coupling it afocally to a telescope.

Agreed. But it is Jupiter and (suprise) at the very top, left of the Moon
is Zubenelgenubi (mag 2.75) just showing.

Did you set your planetarium to the photographer's given co-ords to
check? Some of the info is a bit sketchy, like the time and TZ but the
correspondance is striking (like it should be!).

No I never checked any of this: I was working from the image alone and what
I know about that camera and what you can and cannot image with it. The
bottom line in all this is simply that your reply to the original poster
implied the image was an image of the planet's disc complete with its
characteristic banding, that's all.

Regards,
Dave R

David Randell wrote:
Graham W said:
Nope, it is Jupiter, the band across the middle is at the correct
angle. Just a pity that the Jovian moons don't show. Callisto is
close by at the left hand side of the band.

I think you are mistaken here...

To clarify: by that I meant I think you are mistaken to think that that
image is an image of the *disc* of the planet; For why else mention the
"band across the middle" and it being a pity one of the Galillean
satellites are not visible?

I didn't say it was a truthful rendition of the disc. I'm not responsible
for the out-of-focus performance of his camera, but the fact is that
there is band to be seen in it. The image size is such as to have
enveloped the nearby moons.

The image there has spead quite a lot and has covered the area
where the moons would be even if they were resolvable.

[discussion follows]

All of which is true if the image was critically focussed. But it is
really
out of focus.

Then to reiterate my point above, why mention the banding as evidence
that it is Jupiter, which on a normal reading one takes to mean its a
feature of the planet's disc, and of not seeing one of the Moon's that
would imply its in focus? If by that banding, you now do not mean
banding from the image in focus, what else are we meant to imply from
that?


Simply that the object is Jupter. If not Jupiter, what is it? And if not
Jupiter,
where is Jupiter?

Have a look at the wires and their bits of binding twine
and the shrubbs at the right.

Yes I saw the wires, and the plants, in the bottom right too, but
seeing the wires does not necessarily mean the image is out of focus:
the lens on that camera is 7.8mm-23.4mm so the realtively speaking
large depth of focus may be a factor here too. And more so if a small
aperture was used.

A small aperture was not used (the OP originally said small then
corrected himself and said or implied full aperture). Nothing is
'crisp' in that photo so I assume that the focus was at much nearer
point than anything in the photo.

This is not to say the image is not an image of Jupiter, it may well
be. But if it is, it is not an image of the true disc of the planet
imaged with the A80 without additionally coupling it afocally to a
telescope.

I didn't say it was the true disc. I answered the OP's question about
what it was.

Agreed. But it is Jupiter and (suprise) at the very top, left of the
Moon is Zubenelgenubi (mag 2.75) just showing.

Did you set your planetarium to the photographer's given co-ords to
check? Some of the info is a bit sketchy, like the time and TZ but the
correspondance is striking (like it should be!).

No I never checked any of this: I was working from the image alone and
what I know about that camera and what you can and cannot image with
it. The bottom line in all this is simply that your reply to the
original poster implied the image was an image of the planet's disc
complete with its characteristic banding, that's all.

Then your opening "I think you are mistaken" should have been better
thought about and conditions added.


--
Graham W http://www.gcw.org.uk/ PGM-FI page updated, Graphics Tutorial
WIMBORNE http://www.wessex-astro.org.uk/ Wessex Astro Society's Website
Dorset UK Info, Meeting Dates, Sites & Maps
Change 'news' to 'sewn' in my Reply address to avoid my spam filter.

Michael Weber wrote:
Am Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:16:28 +0100 schrieb Graham W:

Michael Weber wrote:
Am Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:00:10 GMT schrieb Marcus Fox:

"Boo" wrote in message
.. .
Marcus Fox wrote:
On 6th July around 12:30, I took a photo of the moon, on a long
exposure and a narrow aperture. My location at the time was about
27 N and 15 W (Canary Islands). When I looked at the photo I saw an
interesting object above the moon and slightly to the right. Can
someone with astronomy planetarium software check what it is?

Jupiter ? What did it look like ? How far above and to the right ?

About three times the distance above as it was to the right. It was
brighter than any other object, apart from the moon. Certainly looks
like Jupiter, just didn't think I could pick out that much detail
with only a Canon A80. Oh, and I meant wide aperture in my first
post.

http://www.geocities.com/marcusfox/IMG_1564.JPG

Marcus

Huh,
That seems to be a reflection at the lenses in your camera. Its
definetly not an astronomical object, its too big for that.

Nope, it is Jupiter,

Huh, at this size and Brightness?

the band across the middle is at the correct angle.
Just a pity that the Jovian moons don't show. Callisto is close by at
the left hand side of the band.

plz. correct me, but Jovian Moons??? - U R just joking?

quote from Wordweb
jovian: adj.
Of or pertaining to or characteristic of or resembling the planet Jupiter.
"jovian satellites"
/quote

I'd tend to agree with you about the 'ball lightning' photos, though.
--
Graham W http://www.gcw.org.uk/ PGM-FI page updated, Graphics Tutorial
WIMBORNE http://www.wessex-astro.org.uk/ Wessex Astro Society's Website
Dorset UK Info, Meeting Dates, Sites & Maps
Change 'news' to 'sewn' in my Reply address to avoid my spam filter.