|
Here's the worst image ever posted in this thread: But I'm pretty happy with it. I picked up a cheap pair of small binoculars for a camping trip. I like looking at the sky too, was was surprised how much detail I could see with this tiny pair. After several minutes of fiddling, I was able to hold my phone up to one eye piece to capture the shot. Sure it sucks, but craters are visible! That's fantastic (to me)!. I'll fiddle with this some more. Maybe clamp the phone to the binoculars, and that contraption to a rail or something else stable to get a better shot. Then I'll look into some sort of cheapo way to do better.
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 00:09 |
|
|
Hot drat. Please keep posting; it is motivating me to get my own telescope.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
That is incredible.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2017 00:27
|
|
|
darkarchon posted:Hello friends, What the gently caress. You talk about a a color palette- was the color added digitally afterwords? My cursing is in appreciation btw.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2017 01:11
|
|
|
Boy look how busy this thread is all of a sudden. I'd like help identifying a thing. I was stargazing with my eyes (and that of a companion) last night, and we weren't sure what we saw. Conditions: Hazy sky, horizions obscured, only directly above was visible. Caseopia was there. Still, light pollution was extremely small as we were very remote, we could still make out the milkyway. What we saw: We were looking for shooting stars, and saw some. But this object was moving more like a satellite. However it was very bright, seemingly several times brighter than any of the stars visible. We watched it for several seconds and then noticed its brightness was steadily lessening. It went from being the brightest object to being totally invisible over the course of a few seconds. Total viewing time of it was... hard to say, 5 seconds? A bit more? It was around 3 hours after sunset, very rough. Object seemed to be moving roughly south. My best guess was a satellite that was crossing the terminator, though its brightness would be improbable. As a shooting start it seemed to move far too slowly. Any guesses?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2019 02:18
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Your description sounds like an Iridium flare. Thanks, this certainly fits. Amazing how bright they can get.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2019 11:52
|
|
|
hannibal posted:I got out last night and was able to dodge some clouds and get a decent photo of the day-after-conjunction: That's a great shot!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2020 13:48
|
|
|
I didn't know light pollution was measured using the bortle scale. I looked up where I'm spending xmas and it's 3 on the scale. From where I live I can get to level 2 within an hour or so drive. Makes me think about getting a decent pair of binoculars, though I don't like staying up late and I don't like the cold.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2020 21:02
|
|
|
Salt Fish posted:Good news! Being super cold out is correlated with being dark super early. I'm super jealous of skies that dark. I'm an hour away from DC and its still 7+ on the scale. Yeah 3 years ago i moved back to where I grew up. I'd been living in a major metropolitan area that's not quite DC level but still several hours away from any reasonable viewing. Another issue is that it's very frequently cloudy or foggy here too. Still. The idea of someday being able to see the moons of Jupiter or the rings of Saturn is very appealing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2020 21:30
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I really enjoyed the insane banding effect all over the snow landscape right after totality as well. I saw this too, on the grass I was sitting on. What caused this?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2024 14:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 00:09 |
|
|
simble posted:They’re called shadow bands and we don’t really know. The leading theory is that it’s caused by the atmosphere. It seemed to me like faint clouds. I could only see them very close to totality. I figured in other circumstances it was too bright to see them.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2024 14:41
|
|