Looking forward to a future without the past...
Published on September 29, 2005 By GoodMorphing In WinCustomize Talk

I got a digital camera awhile ago.  The other night I was out at the beach experimenting with it.  I took this shot ( http://goodmorphing.wincustomize.com/photos.aspx?a=1&p=18&view=full ) which at first glance seemed like the moon.  But the moon is not in full phase now.  I enlarged that section and whatever it is seems to have something orbiting it.  Also, it is a very 'happy faced' moon.  I know from working with film I can kink the film as I wind it, or leave a bubble, or drop some dust during the development process.. but can a digital camera produce some artifact? 


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Sep 30, 2005
NASA,
You pedantic ......I'll stop now old son.
on Sep 30, 2005
I don't know it there's any connection here, but I saw a documentary regarding the 1969 moon landing, and how many sceptics took anomalies in some of the moon shots to try disproving it. Some of the photography shown had objects which were not visible to the naked eye, but also there were objects that could be seen by the naked eye which were absent in the shots. According to the various experts interviewed, these anomalies are common when photographing the night sky, with or without varying atmospheric conditions being a factor.
on Sep 30, 2005
Gotta say it.
"aliens"
on Sep 30, 2005
Gotta say it.
"aliens"


Well you'd have the low down on that.....didn't you say someplace else that some ET's had just left your joint for warmer weather.
on Sep 30, 2005
?
on Oct 01, 2005

It appears to be a lens flare from off camera somwhere. A bright flash somwhere else, a reflection, or even just the angle of the camera may have caused it.

I've been wondering if it wasn't one of those airport searchlight things... usually  you can see the path from the point of origin up, but I was standing with that area almost exactly behind me.  In that case and with the ambient city lights, perhaps the path blended in?

According to the various experts interviewed, these anomalies are common when photographing the night sky, with or without varying atmospheric conditions being a factor.

That makes me feel less like a lunatic... thanks!

Ande... if it is a planet and I found it, that would make me quite rich?  But if NASA got wind of it maybe not... Maybe I should keep my wealth a secret.

disregard my personal icon.. I lost mine while I was updating my desktop... I'll replace it when I can find a copy.

on Oct 01, 2005
Goodmorphing...can't be too sure with the limited screen magnification I have, but it looks like someone on the international spacestation forgot to turn off the outide light after taking the garbage out
on Oct 01, 2005

Some digital cameras can have 'hot pixels' which show up as white dots. Could be what the small image is.

The large image could be flare, could also be an illuminated dust spot on the lens... it does appear to be out of focus.

I have noticed all your horizons slope from right to left. Do you have a natural lean to the left? Could be that stash of chocolate weighing you down, I'm afraid I'll have to confiscate it... for the sake of your photography of course... 

on Oct 01, 2005
No one else mentioned it so I will, it could be a gnat or some other item actually on the lens itself. It actually looks like it might be a small drop of water. One the main problems I have with my Digital has to do with temperature differences between indoors and outdoors combined with humid air. I always let the camera sit for 20 minutes or so before I try to use it and always check the lens for "fog"
on Oct 01, 2005

Starkers... well then.  I got the goods on them... wonder how much they would be willing to pay to cover up the extra terrestrial littering fee?

hehe.. I've noticed that too fuzzy.  I have a hard time feeling comfortable with the tripod.  I am looking forward to trying that string trick.

I was about asleep when I smelled smoke... a big fire only about a block away from the house that burned down three times already. This is one picture I got.  By the time I got dressed and batteries in my camera.. the fire was a lot less dramatic.

fire 023

on Oct 01, 2005
It was starting to rain a little, Lantec.  I guess I should carry around a lens cloth or something. 
on Oct 01, 2005
wonder how much they would be willing to pay to cover up the extra terrestrial littering fee?


Upon closer inspection, it seems they have an adequate dumpster....think the money to be made there is in the collection fees
on Oct 02, 2005
Okay,three guesses for this:
a. Unexplained digital camera error or artifact.
b. Exstraterrestrial intervension.
c. Your camera got crazy and zoomed in to night sky till planet Uranus!

Are you playing with our minds GoodMorphing?

Cause this looks as if someone just put that in the picture. An artificial add-on,maybe with Photoshop. If not then is a very paradox phenomenon. The light symmetry and distancing does not agree with the rest of the objects in the picture. Unless it's a moving target (e.g. a helicopter or plane and camera didn't focus on it,thus blurred the light emitted.)

Well from my point of view that is all.
on Dec 24, 2005

Are you playing with our minds GoodMorphing?

Cause this looks as if someone just put that in the picture

Nope.  That is really what was there.  But I have been out at that beach a lot more nights in the early evenings.  I'm thinking maybe it could be a low plane coming in, and its light shining through a cloud.  I know it looks like a face, that was why I hesitated to ask. 

The reason I was bouncing this thread up was because I found this tripod that seems interesting  to me.  I like it because it is so small, and can be strapped onto a tree or sign or whatnot.  I think I will get one when I can find one over here.  http://www.spartanphotocenter.com/Ultra_pod.htm

2 Pages1 2