Starship Asterisk*

The image of Maria Rosa Vila I really enjoy, but I miss further details how it was created.
APOD is not any heavens revue, but a professional scientifically oriented site, I guess ...

skywriter, Bavaria

skywriter wrote:The image of Maria Rosa Vila I really enjoy, but I miss further details how it was created.
APOD is not any heavens revue, but a professional scientifically oriented site, I guess ...

skywriter, Bavaria

Did you read the thread? We may not be Maria herself but there is plenty of insight into how the image was created since we also know how.

Wonderful image Maria Rosa Vila! Thanks for sharing...

geckzilla wrote:
Did you read the thread? We may not be Maria herself but there is plenty of insight into how the image was created since we also know how.

Yes I did read the thread, but found only some speculations but no facts. The image is really wonderfull - in the word's best meaning! I would prefer truthfull pictures of our reality und of the universe to see, how the majority of APOD-pictures it shows, instead of artworks. Sorry, that's my critical mind. And let me assure: The image is an artificial composition, but a grandiose professional work!

skywriter wrote:

geckzilla wrote:
Did you read the thread? We may not be Maria herself but there is plenty of insight into how the image was created since we also know how.

Yes I did read the thread, but found only some speculations but no facts. The image is really wonderfull - in the word's best meaning! I would prefer truthfull pictures of our reality und of the universe to see, how the majority of APOD-pictures it shows, instead of artworks. Sorry, that's my critical mind. And let me assure: The image is an artificial composition, but a grandiose professional work!

No, it's not speculation. Careful compositing of multiple images into a single panorama is exactly how it's done.

skywriter wrote:I would prefer truthfull pictures of our reality und of the universe to see, how the majority of APOD-pictures it shows, instead of artworks.

In what way is the image "untruthful" or unrepresentative of reality?

The image is an artificial composition, but a grandiose professional work!

What image isn't an artificial composition? How is it possible for an image to be anything but? Indeed, astronomical images are generally the most "artificial", in that they show things that are impossible for our eyes to detect. Most APODs are composited from multiple layers of data, many nonvisual, stretched into nonlinear intensity spaces to maximize dynamic range, and arbitrarily colored. In comparison, this Milky Way image captures something quite close to what an observer at the location would see, just slightly enhancing sensitivity.

Thanks for your answers, geckzilla and Chris!

We move with the discussion on philosophical paths, did you notice that?

Images ("Photographs") on a scientific level, have primarily to inform, to document and to teach us. If they effect aesthetically, they are particularly good. Is always important by amended photos to describe the nature, degree and method of the change.
If someone uses a fish-eye lens, it indicates my human eyes see the subject different.

The photographer/publisher should never forget: He is responsible for the mapping of motifs and their presentation in front of the viewer.

This is what skywriter occasionally thinks when he looks (with great enjoy) at your excellent photos.