Starship Asterisk*

Howdy all! Some interesting ideas. I would like to know more about the photo:
1) Taken in 2002 - why only come to light now? (pun intendid)
2) What was the plane?
3) Where in the plane was the shooter taking the picture? Esp. in relation to the wing, and which side of the plane.
4) What is the plane engine config, and where was the shooter sitting in relation?
5) What angle, in relation to the plane was the shot taken at (i.e. looking slightly toward the front, or the back)?
6) EXIF says a Powershot S100 took this shot - a quick google says:
- 2.1 megapixels (1.9 effective).
- Max resolution 1600 x 1200 (which is what the picture "is", indicating the picture is not cropped, but can't be verified).
- Focal length 35mm-70mm (yet the EXIF says it was taken with a focal length of 5mm??)
- "Subject distance" (presumably where it was focused) is 65.5m. Not necisarily what they wanted in focus on.
- App. f/2.8 (minimum for this camera)
- Exposure 1/15sec. Seems like quite a sharp picture given a slow shutter speed, and shaking of the aircraft?
7) Are there any other photo's in this sequence - no matter how bad?

So given we probably won't get any answers to those questions or contradictions, and assuming the pic is legitimate,
my guess is that this was a 4 engine aircraft, and the shooter was sitting just behind the wing on the left hand side of the aircraft. The camera is pointing
slightly away from the front of the aircraft (and also slightly away from the wing/engine that may have appeared slightly to the right of the picture).
What you might be seeing is the start of contrails, (compressed air/ and condensed water vapour), as it goes over the wing, and more
spcifically in this case, throught the engines. That would produce four (or two from one wing, as in this picture) "sprial cones", as looking from the camera
vanatage point. Then either the sunset (probable), reflection rays, or perhaps even the planes' red navigation/beacon lights lighting the contrails.
If the 65m focus point is to be beleived, the "contrails" would be closer (anything for 2m to 20m I guess) and the actual contrails slightly out of focus,
which it does look like to me. I note on the far left, the "orange" starts to look like it's refracting, pehaps indicating the camera angel more
"in line" with the plane (perhaps 40 degrees) rather than 70/80/90 degree pointing directly outwards?

Quite a reletively dark background would make the cameras metering over expose the very bright "contrail/cloud", perhaps giving the "contrail/cloud"
it expremely bright look, it may not have looked so bright to the naked eye.

Just some thoughts, nothing solid!

Apex, you forgot to ask about the use of a polarizing filter.

The red glow over Minn. is probably caused by a Vietnam vet suffering from Agent Orange who now wishes not to be the only one suffering from its effects.

Hello.

I think that glarysun got it right.

I had also used google-earth to get exactly the same apparent altitute, orientation and angle as the photograph. After comparing the google-earth view with the APOD photograph (using Alt-Tab to go back and forth like a primitive blink-comparator), it seems that what one is seeing is red-tinted light from the setting sun reflecting off the surface of Strunks Lake on the Mississippi River. This reflected light is causing the edge of the cloud deck through which the airplane is flying to reflect and scatter the red light and create the interesting glow seen in the photograph. The notoriously poor window clarity and internal reflections of the camera lens may have added some additional glare.

I love APOD...

as a competent anthropologist, and a total science tragic, is it at all possible that plasma associated with storm born electrical events has anything to do with this lovely affect? c.bird

I think the most logical conclusion would be that the light of the sunset is being scattered by moisture in the air. Red light has the longest wavelengths in the visible spectrum and it's likely that combination of the angle of this viewer as well as the filtration of the light through the aircraft window caused the camera (and the eye) to capture those long, red wavelengths. Also, as a photographer, I've had my share of reflections off of glass and this is unlike any reflection I've seen.

Might it simply be the underside of the plane reflecting the sunset onto the thin cloud/mist layer beneath it?

If the time and date are correct, the sun has set already (even though the time is daylight time, not standard time). The reddish look on the lake is not from the sun (at least not directly). The sun, if it had not actually set, would be in the west at this time of the year. The lake is northwest or north of the photographer, so the light directly from the sun would not reflect back to the viewer. It is possible that the red on the lake is a reflection of red tinted cirrus clouds after sunset.

I believe that the glow is a reflection from one of the plane's lights or beacons. Whether the reflection is on a translucent cloud, or virga, I do not know. Another possibility is that a flash went off on the camera and reflected back off the window.

This is not an effect that was caused by the airplane. This can be shown by observing the reflection of the cloud like orange object on a lake in the upper right of the picture. The reflection clearly shows the orange cloud like object imbedded in normal grey-blue clouds. The question is why was this object, and this object only, colored orange? The colors are certainly representative of a normal sunset. My guess is that something is attenuating the shorter wavelenght light on its path between the sun and this cloud like object. The attenuation most certainly is occuring in the atmosphere, probably locally. Some combination of moisture and air density?

Were the plane's landing headlioghts on? if so, it may be some rainbow effect, or even plain reflection from the clouds.

I don't buy the reflection theory. Wisps are too clear for reflected imagery and I see a 90 degree arc of faint orange where I understand the upper corner of seat back should be blocking light.

Sunset was 7:09 according to http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/a ... =-11&day=1. EXIF time is incorrect for locality. No direct sunlight on ground but lighted clouds as evidenced by reflection in lake prominent to "blob's" right.

I believe sun is at or below horizon for terrestrial viewers but shining orange through a wisp of cloud just below aircraft at about 5,500 feet.

In any case, wonderful discussion all around.

As I looked at the picture something was eerily familliar abut that color. One of the earlier posters mentioned the photo was taken with an S-100, a canon camera. I picked up my canon a-70 pointed at my comp screen and pressed the button half way in autofocus mode and bathed everything in orange light from the auto focus beam precisely the same shade as in the pic. I believe it is reflection from the window as there is a concentration point of light emission. Looking at an s-100 the autofocus light emitter is placed above and slightly right of the lens.

TRL wrote:As I looked at the picture something was eerily familliar abut that color. One of the earlier posters mentioned the photo was taken with an S-100, a canon camera. I picked up my canon a-70 pointed at my comp screen and pressed the button half way in autofocus mode and bathed everything in orange light from the auto focus beam precisely the same shade as in the pic. I believe it is reflection from the window as there is a concentration point of light emission. Looking at an s-100 the autofocus light emitter is placed above and slightly right of the lens.

I know exactly what you mean, our Canon IXUS (500?) had something similar. Not unthinkeable.

Hi Everyone,

For me, the key clue in this image is in the reflection seen in the large pond "above" the racetrack. I see more orange and gray there which leads me to interpret this image as a sunset phenomenon seen from above. Also the time is right for such an event. There may have been virga present which I have seen before as curving sheets of glowing red-orange light when back lit... seen from the vantage point of the airplane, would make it harder to interpret the phenomenon I suspect.

If the time and date are correct, the sun has set already (even though the time is daylight time, not standard time). The reddish look on the lake is not from the sun (at least not directly). The sun, if it had not actually set, would be in the west at this time of the year. The lake is northwest or north of the photographer, so the light directly from the sun would not reflect back to the viewer. It is possible that the red on the lake is a reflection of red tinted cirrus clouds after sunset.

I believe that the glow is a reflection from one of the plane's lights or beacons. Whether the reflection is on a translucent cloud, or virga, I do not know. Another possibility is that a flash went off on the camera and reflected back off the window.

This is what I stated in an earlier post. I am more confident in what the explanation is NOT, than what it is. That is, it is not a direct reflection from the sun (assuming the local time and date are correct). Sunset was around 7:08 CDT. The glow is on the forward side of the translucent cloud (if that's what it is) facing the photographer. Even if this were sunlight, I think it would be on the back side (facing where the sun should be). Even though the sun sets later at higher altitudes, I don't think the plane was high enough to catch the sun's rays, judging from the closeness of the ground in the photo and the fact the plane was landing.

Some pretty interesting guesses....

But I do have a question re: these types of images - that is the type of image that gets APOD readers throwing guesses out there as to causes for things seen in images. Is there ever a definite answer/follow up to the questions posed by these images? I know there was a recent image that featured light pillars over Latvia, and it generated a lot of great discussion, but was there ever resolution? An answer as to what caused the pillars? I guess what I'm getting at is do we, or will we ever find out what the definite answer is to the question(s) raised by these images? Or is this all purely for the sake of discussion? (Which is fine, I learn lots that way too. But I'd like to kinda close the loop on understanding what I'm seeing in these sorts of images. If possible.)

Just curious.....

Well this is one of the nicest sunset-on-the-clouds pictures I have seen in ages and a new perspective as it's from an aircraft.
There was clearly a lot of this 'glowing cloud' around when the photographer took this snap as a) unless he was sitting with the camera pointing out the window at just the right time then anything small / localised would've been missed down to the airspeed of the aircraft so I imagine the photographer saw a lot of this stuff they were flying through, had time to get the camera ready and snap-away and this was one of the finest images from a whole set and b) if you look at the 'lake' over on the righthandside of the pic you can see the underside of more sunlit cloud reflected off the water much further away... cool.
There's no question this is just sunlit cloud caught between breaks in the clouds sunward and produces a wonderful image... no mystery, just plenty of beauty.

The light coloured arc in the bottom left of the glow looks artificial to me as possibly do the straight, brighter streaks near its centre. For that reason I think this is not a natural phenomenon.

Many years ago the BBC was presented with some cine film taken by an aircraft passenger and apparently showing a flying saucer. The BBC put a cameraman on the same plane in the same seat and he too filmed the UFO; the trouble was that a slight camera movement showed the object to be part of the rear wing which had been distorted by the window!

Recreating the conditions of this picture would obviously be harder, but I suspect that if you could illuminate the whole aircraft from the same angle as the sun in this picture, then a similar glow would appear in the same window using the same camera, and possibly to the naked eye as well. Then it would simply be a matter of deciding the path of the light rays.

I agree with other contributors that the EXIF data may well be wrong and should be disregarded.

When I went to the (window) link in the main article describing polarized light through airplane windows, this information I believe solidifies my suspicion due to the stated fact that the windows are (plastic and double paned) and that this is a result of the autofocus emitter reflecting back from the outboard pane. The blob has a concentration point. In may 2006 a friend and I were storm chasing a wall cloud I remember having to delete pictures due to the reflection from the autofocus light off of the windshield. It was raining and I had disabled the flash but still had an orange out from the focuser light. Hence my earlier statement (eerily familliar).

Indigo_Sunrise wrote:Some pretty interesting guesses....

But I do have a question re: these types of images - that is the type of image that gets APOD readers throwing guesses out there as to causes for things seen in images. Is there ever a definite answer/follow up to the questions posed by these images? I know there was a recent image that featured light pillars over Latvia, and it generated a lot of great discussion, but was there ever resolution? An answer as to what caused the pillars? I guess what I'm getting at is do we, or will we ever find out what the definite answer is to the question(s) raised by these images? Or is this all purely for the sake of discussion? (Which is fine, I learn lots that way too. But I'd like to kinda close the loop on understanding what I'm seeing in these sorts of images. If possible.)

Just curious.....

Hi Indigo Sunrise, I'm new to this site, so I would like to know if they resolve these issues also. I'm just curious about your username. Have you actually seen an "indigo" sunrise? I did from a plane once.

Looks to me like a blurry red light reflection from the camera which deceptively blends in with the clouds. Did the photographer see the same thing as the camera? Does the camera have one of those little red lights on the front? I think they're part of the auto-focus. My opinion would change depending on this info.

york32283 wrote:Looks to me like a blurry red light reflection from the camera which deceptively blends in with the clouds. Did the photographer see the same thing as the camera? Does the camera have one of those little red lights on the front? I think they're part of the auto-focus. My opinion would change depending on this info.

Looking up a canon (s-100) on canons website the front image of the camera has the focus light emitter slightly right and above the lens and left of the viewfinder. Looking at the photo being discussed the brightest part of the blob aligns with this configuration if the camera were placed against the interior pane.

I think that it was sort of a stormy windy kinda day and that because the water that you can see is whitecapped or at least that's what it looks like at least from my perspective. But as for the um glow I think that it is the suns light hitting and passing through some thin clouds and hitting some thicker clouds and reflecting of some fog like fog similiar to when its foggy outside and you shine a flashlight though it and you can see the beam of light accept on a much bigger scale. Also I am only 14 so this is not a very scientific theory.

TRL wrote:

york32283 wrote:Looks to me like a blurry red light reflection from the camera which deceptively blends in with the clouds. Did the photographer see the same thing as the camera? Does the camera have one of those little red lights on the front? I think they're part of the auto-focus. My opinion would change depending on this info.

Looking up a canon (s-100) on canons website the front image of the camera has the focus light emitter slightly right and above the lens and left of the viewfinder. Looking at the photo being discussed the brightest part of the blob aligns with this configuration if the camera were placed against the interior pane.

This I thought about also but normally the light is more round and shinier than pictured

I'd kind of find it weird that a photographer would pick up his camera to shoot a phenomenon he couldn't have noticed without having already been looking through the viewfinder and already about to shoot. I suppose he could have been going to shoot something else in the field, but there isn't terribly much else there that's particularly photogenic...

This looks like zero-order glow to me, honestly. Sunset light passing through clear air beneath encroaching rainclouds, and back-illuminating sheets of wind-blown rain.