APOD: A Triple Sunrise Over Gdansk Bay (2009 Aug 04)

[munnecke]

I used to fly sailplanes in Lake Elsinore, California, east of Los Angeles. We used to wait for the inversion layer to push out from Los Angeles, because it would generate lift as the smog bank from LA spread eastward. I'd fly along the edge of this layer, and could feel when one wing fell out of the lift area, so it was a fairly sharp vertical distinction. The edge was not visible - I had to fly along it and feel it or see it in my instruments.

If for some reason there was front moving through, it's vertical nature might create the horizontal refractions we see in this image. Judging from the angles of the images, I would image the (cooler) front moving from the right to the left, probably pretty slowly.

Tom Munnecke

[mauromarussi]

I don't think pic was taken through a window, the angle from sun and reflections vary between "other" and "frames" pic while house is not moving.
I think it's a reflection between ice? clouds.

[gwrede]

I have a hard time understanding why this is even discussed here. Do people really walk through their lives with eyes shut??

This "triple sunrise" is taken through a double glazed window.

All that is needed is that the window panes are not exactly parallel. This is actually the norm when they are in separate frames that don't close exactly tight. All you have to do to verify this, is to take two pieces of window glass and hold them in your hands while looking at a bright object (not the sun, that's dangerous). You'll see that they will have to be exactly parallel for you /not/ to see multiple suns (or lamps).

Almost twenty years ago I was visiting my late father. We were sitting in his living room, the sun was setting, and I happened to look at such multiple suns in the window. I noticed a big sunspot, and said to him "hey there's a sunspot that is big enough to see with the unaided eye". Of course he didn't believe me. So I fetched the binoculars and he said "Hey, you're not going to look at the sun with them!". I wasn't. Instead I went outside and placed them so that their shadow was on the wall 6 feet away, and then aimed them at the sun, and focused them. This projected two pictures of the sun (one for each eye) on the wall. Now the sunspot was painfully obvious in the images. He was very impressed.

If you try to do this at home, have another object (a tree trunk, a person) right next to the binoculars. Holding them slightly obliquely moves the projected sun picture to the side, into the shadow of that object, where it is much easier to see fine detail.

[eriks1860]

The glass pane theory makes a lot of sense. Untill is gets to be confirmed there is another interesting possibility.
The timing of the picture could relate the effect to the eruption of the Sarycheb Peak volcano in Russia on June 12th. Volcano dust climbed as high as 80km, causing reflections of sunlight untill allmost midnight and lighting up clouds from "above" as you can see in the picture, taken in Norway on June 25th http://www.dmi.dk/dmi/smuk_nat_med_lysende_skyer and lare on in - July 14th - in the Netherlands.http://www.knmi.nl/cms/content/57136/op ... aargenomen

[Lasse H]

Differences between different pictures are easily explained by holding the camera in slightly different places in relation to the window. Individual window panes are not exactly plane - a very slight curvature in one pane creates varying angles and reflections.
Ice clouds s flat and reflecting as windows do not exist.

I don't think pic was taken through a window, the angle from sun and reflections vary between "other" and "frames" pic while house is not moving.
I think it's a reflection between ice? clouds.

[Eamon Shute]

I have also seen this effect when looking at the moon through double glazing. It explains the features of photographs perfectly - the fact that there are several images of decreasing intensity and equal spacing but unequal height, the different spacing in different photos, and the clouds in the same place on each copy of the sun. I am surprised that anyone could think it is an atmospheric effect!

[Lasse H]

Your sharp eyes seem to have offered a final answer to the problem: there certainly are faint reflections visible in the dark area of that photo, and of course there is a window in between. The photographer is advised to open the window the next time, before taking pictures of the sun. Case closed?

Hi,

i think, there is a window.

there are reflections of the balcony in the lower left corner of the first picture:



in the red sections i guess there are reflection of vertical bars and in the green section a handrail or someting else like a windowframe or windowsill.
i assume, thats the window stands 45° to the sun.

see ya,

Heiko

PS: sorry for bad grammar, i write english not very often.

[Alnilam]

I'm French and I hope you will excuse my poor English.

In my opinion, the reflection trough a double glass windows is not the right explanation of this view. If you look at the first picture (in the APOD), it's obvious that the second and third suns (fainter and fainter) are behind the dark cloud/mist layer and this layer seems very continuous. In a glass reflection, the layer will be replicated and/or the sun reflection in the window will be "superimposed" foreground. On the contrary, they look like if they where farther and farther in the background.

For me, it looks like reflection of the sun on far layer of cloud/mist. But the horizontal axis of these reflections is quite strange !

Could it be possible that clouds (on the top of the "first" sun) are so icy that the sun can reflect on them and it's reflection be visible on far layer acting like a "screen" ? Another hypothesis : when we look the sun set, in fact, the sun is already behind the horizon and we can only see it because of the atmospheric refraction. Could it be possible that atmospheric conditions (layers of cold/warm air, ice) produces multiple pathes of this image, something like interference franges ? (during eclipse the very sharp image of the sun produces "flying shadows" that are similar to interference franges, due to atmosphere)

[Ursa]

Ok, you knew someone was going to say it ~ it's a visual Polish joke.

[AlEasy]

These are reflections in the window between the photographer and the sun. It's obvious if you look at the cloud-patterns of the main image and the first mirrored image in this photograph: http://apod.nasa.gov/image/0908/IMG_9805.JPG. There's also the reflection off the water (the small hourglass-shaped light-pattern at the bottom of the sun), which is clearly visible in the mirror image as well. Since it is lifted off the surface of the water and unlikely to be reflected from any atmospheric condition it has to originate between photographer and image.

[Rocco]

Hi,

In my opinion there was something like window glass in front of the camera.

I brightened up the first image and attached it to my post - there are some more reflections of the environment in the picture as you can see at the trees in the middle.

Jochen.

[Boris]

Hello to everyone!

I do not think this is a window effect since we see the first mirage of the sun behind some clouds in the sky. I think a reflection by a window or horizontal glas should project the image in front of any clouds.
But we do see the typical reflection of the sun underneath it in the face of the ocean. The first mirage does as well show this reflection but without the contact to the surface of the ocean. Therefore it seems to me that the only way a mirage of the sun is possibly to appear would be by reflection due to the cloudy mist in front of the sun which couses blurring of the first image of the sun in the picture. This can only be a very rare natural phenomenon since you do need two fronts of clouds which allow the sun to be observed but do yet reflect the image on clouds in an optimal range behind.

Boris

[Rocco]

If you look at the first picture (in the APOD), it's obvious that the second and third suns (fainter and fainter) are behind the dark cloud/mist layer and this layer seems very continuous. In a glass reflection, the layer will be replicated and/or the sun reflection in the window will be "superimposed" foreground. On the contrary, they look like if they where farther and farther in the background.

Hi Alnilam,

Maybe the second and third sun seem to be behind the dark layer because mainly the brightest parts (the upper calotte) of the sun are visible in the reflections.

If you lower the brightness of the image, you can see that the upper half of the sun is much more brighter than the rest of the sun - it is totally overexposed in the image. The lower half of the original sun is dimmed by some clouds e. g. and gets dimmed again during the reflection in the window - so the image shows for the reflection suns mainly the bright parts of the original sun. The axis of the reflections matches the alignment of the clouds in front of the real sun - so it seems that the clouds may lie in front of the reflections.

Jochen.

[Shaw_Bob]

The window glass discussion is easily ended - all we need are some test images.

Anyone?

Bob Shaw

[ozo]

I think the same thing. What clinched it for me is the reflection of the boundary between the sun and the horizon seen clearly in the first reflection to the left of the sun. If this had been an atmosperic effect I don't think that the horizon would have been reflected so exactly, if at all.

[Rocco]

Geckzilla already posted some similar pictures: http://asterisk.apod.com/vie ... =a#p108812

[NilsK]

Hi rocco/Jochen,

You beat me to it with your brightened up version of the photograph. It was clearly taken through a window, at an angle of about 45 degrees I'd guess. One can see all kinds of reflections of the interior of the room (see arrows):

through_glass.jpg (85.16 KiB) Viewed 4683 times

Pity that this wasn't some kind of freak atmospherical phenomenon, as that would have been even more interesting...

Cheers,

Nils 8)

[rogerscottq]

Yes, it would appear from Rocco's adjusted rendition of the long range
photo (by Rocco on Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:29 am) one can see lens effects
and 'ghost' images or indications of reflection as may occur when a
photo is taken from behind a glass pane. That it might be from behind
some 'techo-glass' or gas-filled double or 'triple' paned panel is
conceivable. It appears in the distance there is an oil platform
and the towers of that also seem to show some offset or perhaps the
limitations of digital resolution.

However, I have seen images published before the digital era that also show
a lateral displacement of luminous body and reflection of same in a body of
water. I always attributed this to some post-capture editing for artistic
purposes.

I tried to post something about this earlier here, so I apologize if this
is redundant. In the case I am thinking of, the image was of a moon rising
over a lake. The lake reflection, however, was not aligned with the body of
the moon in the image.

I attributed this to perhaps the photographer using a 'full moon' merged
with a lake reflection of a half or perhaps a three-quarter moon. If it
was a composite, it was masterfully done.

In this instance, I'm inclined to think the reporter was honest in saying
it was visible to the naked eye, but a naked eye looking through a double or
triple-paned glass door might give this effect. The focal length of near objects aberrations were
much too subtle to perceive and less illuminated to be recordable or
noticeable? Yet the 'oil derick' or platform aberrations trouble me. they
seem to move in the opposite direction to the aberration. If they are
booms that do lean to the right, but are 'chopped up' due to pixalition
or resolution limitations then . . .

I'm aware that a triple image can also come from simply a coating on one
pane of the glass, so as not to require three separate panes. Gas-filled
insulation panel, and perhaps some special coating on one or more surfaces.

I don't know. Fascinating. The door engineers didn't get the panes
perfectly parallel, yes, plausible, probable. I don't know, however,
if any plausible explanation automatically excludes some atmospheric
lateral displacement of image. Not having personally experienced all things.

[Belbear]

I concur to the window reflection theory, because:

-The wide-angle picture clearly shows reflections from some nearby objects in the bottom left corner, so at least this one picture has been taken through a window pane at an oblique angle. I can only assume the zoomed-in pictures were as well.

-We can assume it's a double-glazed window, because that's the standard for the last two decades. These windows give multiple reflections that are offset at odd angles because of imperfect alignment of the two window panes.

-It explains why the author has seen the triple sunset with the naked eye. These reflections are always there but usually one does not notice them because of lack of contrast. The rising sun provides the necessary contrast, in those few minutes it's not yet too bright to look at.

-All ghost images are identical to the primary sun image. If atmospherical effects at long distance would cause reflections, the combination of sun, water surface and cloud layers would look different for each ghost image. The primary image is of course overexposed, and details are hidden by optical blooming. But these details show clearly in the much fainter ghost images.

-The strongly magnified pictures show a blurring of the reflections. This too is perfectly normal for window reflections. After all, window panes are NOT manufactured to optical mirror standards!

To conclude, I wish to congratulate Noemi for -deliberately or not- deceiving the APOD webmasters and making it to the site with this picture, I would regret it if various copycats would try to do the same with this easy-to-reproduce effect.

Chris

[Alnilam]

The "hourglass reflection" leads me to watch at the sea surface and my conclusion is quite different !

The "second sun" produces it's own reflection on the sea surface. It's obvious when the picture is lightened. So the "second sun" is far in the background, not a foreground reflection through a window. You may argue that the sea surface could also reflect in the window but, if so, the picture is not coherent because the sun "wings" (overexposed parts of the sunny clouds), very much more lighted, produces no reflection.

I draw this on the image attached below : green arrows for the sea reflection, blue arrows for the possible window reflection of the sea surface but missing for the "sun wings".

Have you noticed little bright zones in the sky (right side) on few images, indicating probable icy clouds ? Note : the lightened firts photo is not probant for me. I try it and, at large scale, the "reflections in the trees" looks only like orange parts in the leafs probably lightened by the rising sun (you have also one "orange" spot on the balcony). The only obviuos reflection of the sun in this image is near the center and is obviously a reflection within the lens (because of its central symetry with the sun).

[scjurgen]

I opt pretty much for a glass reflection (occam's razor teaches).

The distance of the 2 (or 3) after images is decreasing, much an effect of the angle of the window towards the scene.
In this pic I have put direct sun image as red, camera as black plane, and the ghost reflections inside the glass in orange.


Also: the more far away the camera from the window, the less distant the reflections. the featherd borders should be an effect of the refraction on the glass surface.

The slight tilting from the horizon is simply because of the much higher than horizon position, but can also be induced by a non vertical window.

The previous mentioned clues (glass reflections in the wide angle shot) are consistent with my 2 Cents...

Jurgen

[Nileshp]

we do not have much information about camera used.
but some digital cameras can produce such effect due to pixel saturation

very bright sun can cause overcharged pixel.
if these pixel do not discharge before next exposure, ghost images can be seen for bright sun.

we donot have complete sequence of images
missing images between IMG_9802/IMG_9805/IMG_9810 can help to understand phenomenon better.

- Nilesh Puntambekar

[scjurgen]

we do not have much information about camera used.
[...]- Nilesh Puntambekar

It has been stated that the 'effect' was visible with the naked eye. Let's trust at least this fact. Glass reflections are visible to eyes and cameras.
Jurgen

[Lasse H]

We see from your lightened picture that the second sun is an exact copy of the first, including the 'foot' at the bottom, due to the usual mirage in the atmosphere layer above the sea. The bright reflection in the sea under the first (the real) sun is also there of course. The cloud in front of the sun is also there. Thus everything that shines through the window, and that is bright enough, is also reflected between the window panes once (first back, then forward again), and so creating a virtual image, here referred to as the 'second sun'. This virtual image is displaced towards the left (and slightly upwards) due to the small angle between the two window panes, which are never exactly flat and parallell. The sun itself is even bright enough to create a third virtual image, further displaced to the left and up, by means of double reflections between the panes. No further discussions are needed, I feel. Millions of people must have seen this (but few bother to take photos of it).

The "hourglass reflection" leads me to watch at the sea surface and my conclusion is quite different !

The "second sun" produces it's own reflection on the sea surface. It's obvious when the picture is lightened. So the "second sun" is far in the background, not a foreground reflection through a window. You may argue that the sea surface could also reflect in the window but, if so, the picture is not coherent because the sun "wings" (overexposed parts of the sunny clouds), very much more lighted, produces no reflection.

I draw this on the image attached below : green arrows for the sea reflection, blue arrows for the possible window reflection of the sea surface but missing for the "sun wings".

Have you noticed little bright zones in the sky (right side) on few images, indicating probable icy clouds ? Note : the lightened firts photo is not probant for me. I try it and, at large scale, the "reflections in the trees" looks only like orange parts in the leafs probably lightened by the rising sun (you have also one "orange" spot on the balcony). The only obviuos reflection of the sun in this image is near the center and is obviously a reflection within the lens (because of its central symetry with the sun).

[culwin]

The mirage suns are actually demons that have been sent to devour the world.