APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Comments and questions about the APOD on the main view screen.
User avatar
APOD Robot
Otto Posterman
Posts: 3721
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 3:27 am

APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by APOD Robot » Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:05 am

Image Reunion Island Eclipse

Explanation: The New Moon's dark shadow crossed planet Earth on September 1. In silhouette the Moon didn't quite cover the Sun though, creating an an annular solar eclipse. The shadow's narrow central path was about 100 kilometers wide at maximum eclipse. Beginning in the South Atlantic, it tracked toward the east across Africa, ending in the Indian Ocean. Waiting on the Indian Ocean's Reunion Island, eclipse watchers enjoyed a view just north of the eclipse centerline, the annular phase lasting a few minutes or less. Clouds threaten the nearly eclipsed Sun but create a dramatic sky in this wide-angle and telephoto composite at a partial phase from the northern side of the 50 kilometer wide island.

<< Previous APOD This Day in APOD Next APOD >>
[/b]

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8999
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by geckzilla » Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:23 am

Was the land added in or what? This picture messes with my head.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

BPCooper
Ensign
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:17 am

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by BPCooper » Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:32 am

Unquestionably a composite if not more.

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 14612
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Chris Peterson » Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:37 am

geckzilla wrote:Was the land added in or what? This picture messes with my head.
It's just wrong. It's either been badly composited, or badly processed. That's just not what an annular eclipse looks like. The Sun still lights up the sky significantly, so the Moon never looks black, or close to it. The Moon here should look about the same intensity as the sky we see glowing on the outside of the Sun.

We see this same processing error many times with eclipse pictures.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8999
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by geckzilla » Sat Sep 03, 2016 4:40 am

Chris Peterson wrote:We see this same processing error many times with eclipse pictures.
And the editors don't seem to care. I'm not even gonna try moderating the FB page or here today unless they're laced with profanity. Seriously, I give up on this picture.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
Ann
4725 Å
Posts: 9897
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:33 am

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Ann » Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:18 am

geckzilla wrote:Was the land added in or what? This picture messes with my head.
Love your ability to spot an "impossible" image right away, Geck.

And Chris, I admire your analytical mind, of course.

Ann
Color Commentator

Cookies
Asternaut
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:16 am

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Cookies » Sat Sep 03, 2016 5:28 am

BPCooper wrote:Unquestionably a composite if not more.
Yes, a bad composite. We also need to look at the EXIF data for this photo. It indicates a lens FL of 19mm. I can tell you the Sun doesn't appear that big with a 19mm lens. Even on a crop sensor camera. Something is amiss. I wish APOD would go back to recognizing photographers who create images that are more true to life rather than Photoshopped fantasy composites.

User avatar
RJN
Baffled Boffin
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 1:58 pm
Location: Michigan Tech

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by RJN » Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:44 am

Thank you all for vetting this image. The editors do expect to make some sort of change. Until then, since we know of the problem already and there is a possibility that future comments will be unkind, this thread will be locked. If you have new information about the image that you feel it is important that the editors know, please send email to the editors. We apologize for the inconvenience. - RJN

User avatar
owlice
Guardian of the Codes
Posts: 8356
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 4:18 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by owlice » Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:42 pm

The description on APOD has been updated. ~ Owl
A closed mouth gathers no foot.

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8999
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by geckzilla » Sun Sep 04, 2016 1:18 am

Ok, I'll try to explain why this image bothers me so much aside from just the clouds, sky, and the landscape seeming not to match. Here, I've attached an image with some lines drawn on in order to question what they are. I assume that they are actually painted/airbrushed onto the image and not real, but I can't be 100% sure. What would be remarkable and fascinating if it was real is reduced to something that is either confusing at best (if intended as an art piece, but not mentioned) or deceptive at worst (if intended to represent reality).

See the top arcing shadow line that crosses the syzygy, marked in green. Why is it curved? How could it be curved? Is it real? Almost certainly not. How could it be?

Next, check the shaded region of the hills, marked in magenta. Are we to take this as a shadow cast by the moon onto the landscape? Why it it also curved? Is it real? I highly doubt it.
MoserEclipse.jpg
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
alter-ego
Serendipitous Sleuthhound
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:51 am
Location: Redmond, WA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by alter-ego » Sun Sep 04, 2016 1:46 am

geckzilla wrote:Ok, I'll try to explain why this image bothers me so much aside from just the clouds, sky, and the landscape seeming not to match. Here, I've attached an image with some lines drawn on in order to question what they are. I assume that they are actually painted/airbrushed onto the image and not real, but I can't be 100% sure. What would be remarkable and fascinating if it was real is reduced to something that is either confusing at best (if intended as an art piece, but not mentioned) or deceptive at worst (if intended to represent reality).

See the top arcing shadow line that crosses the syzygy, marked in green. Why is it curved? How could it be curved? Is it real? Almost certainly not. How could it be?

Next, check the shaded region of the hills, marked in magenta. Are we to take this as a shadow cast by the moon onto the landscape? Why it it also curved? Is it real? I highly doubt it.
Thanks Geck for giving your impression. Your experience with images and image processing cause me to further ponder. However,
I view the shadows and apparent curvatures as purely coincidental and resulting from the extreme intensity ranges, i.e. overexposed Sun limb, to underexposed terrain. The reduced solar irradiance on the ground, forward scatter from the thinner cloud edges coupled with ground shadows from the clouds makes the scene plausible to me.

Now regarding the new description, I wonder why the telephoto?
Within a few percent that I can measure, the eclipse is the correct size on the image for a D5300 sensor using a 19mm f.l. lens, and I don't see how spatial resolution benefits from a telephoto. Unless the wide-angle image of the sun was so ever bad that telephoto image helped? Even so, the solar image size would have to be reduced to properly match the FoV of the 19mm f.l. image. Base on my interpretation of this image, the description makes less sense to me now. However, I'm having some problem making sense of the eclipse disk and an apparent double image along the dark edge

Another case of wanting some details - for me it's not to prove misrepresentation, just to understand it.
A pessimist is nothing more than an experienced optimist

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8999
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by geckzilla » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:00 am

alter-ego wrote:However,
I view the shadows and apparent curvatures as purely coincidental and resulting from the extreme intensity ranges, i.e. overexposed Sun limb, to underexposed terrain. The reduced solar irradiance on the ground, forward scatter from the thinner cloud edges coupled with ground shadows from the clouds makes the scene plausible to me.
I thought that might be the case too, but the more I look at it makes me think that it was added on top of everything for no apparent reason or perhaps just because it looked cool. Like I said, confusing at best.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
alter-ego
Serendipitous Sleuthhound
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:51 am
Location: Redmond, WA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by alter-ego » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:08 am

geckzilla wrote:
alter-ego wrote:However,
I view the shadows and apparent curvatures as purely coincidental and resulting from the extreme intensity ranges, i.e. overexposed Sun limb, to underexposed terrain. The reduced solar irradiance on the ground, forward scatter from the thinner cloud edges coupled with ground shadows from the clouds makes the scene plausible to me.
I thought that might be the case too, but the more I look at it makes me think that it was added on top of everything for no apparent reason or perhaps just because it looked cool. Like I said, confusing at best.
For sure.
So I have to ask, did the description change result from communication with the authors or from some other assessment? Do you know?
A pessimist is nothing more than an experienced optimist

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 14612
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Chris Peterson » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:25 am

alter-ego wrote:Now regarding the new description, I wonder why the telephoto?
Within a few percent that I can measure, the eclipse is the correct size on the image for a D5300 sensor using a 19mm f.l. lens...
I'm guessing that's a coincidence. It would only be the case if the image published here is cropped from the full frame. I think the full frame was reduced. So the eclipse is telescopic, the landscape is wide angle.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
alter-ego
Serendipitous Sleuthhound
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:51 am
Location: Redmond, WA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by alter-ego » Sun Sep 04, 2016 3:57 am

Chris Peterson wrote:
alter-ego wrote:Now regarding the new description, I wonder why the telephoto?
Within a few percent that I can measure, the eclipse is the correct size on the image for a D5300 sensor using a 19mm f.l. lens...
I'm guessing that's a coincidence. It would only be the case if the image published here is cropped from the full frame. I think the full frame was reduced. So the eclipse is telescopic, the landscape is wide angle.
I'm betting the frame was cropped from it's original size. The D5300 sensor is 23.5mm x 15.6mm containing 4000 x 6000 pixels (24M). With the 19mm f.l. lens the pixel angular size is right in line with the APOD within a few percent. That seems too close to be coincidental to me.
A pessimist is nothing more than an experienced optimist

Astrofan

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Astrofan » Sun Sep 04, 2016 4:18 am

I spoke with the author on FB and he tells me, that the picture is a composite of 3 RAWs.
Yes its a composition of 3 raw and i have darker the moon for aesthetic issue .....
https://www.facebook.com/steph.design97 ... 9180108093#

User avatar
alter-ego
Serendipitous Sleuthhound
Posts: 851
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:51 am
Location: Redmond, WA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by alter-ego » Sun Sep 04, 2016 5:15 am

Astrofan wrote:I spoke with the author on FB and he tells me, that the picture is a composite of 3 RAWs.
Yes its a composition of 3 raw and i have darker the moon for aesthetic issue .....
geckzilla wrote:...but the more I look at it makes me think that it was added on top of everything for no apparent reason or perhaps just because it looked cool. Like I said, confusing at best.
Good call, geck. The darker region along the top also demarcates the darker moon limb that bothered me. It looks obvious to me now that the author noted the "darker" moon addition for aesthetics.
So that accounts for 2 RAWs anyway. I won't make bets on where the 3rd RAW resides ;)
A pessimist is nothing more than an experienced optimist

Elias Chasiotis
Ensign
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:59 am

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Elias Chasiotis » Sun Sep 04, 2016 5:43 am

I absolutely dislike this image, the appearance of the partially eclipsed sun looks totally wrong and not natural looking at all. Once it is said it is a composition, i guess there is no problem. But how such a dark moon silhouette was captured during an annular eclipse? The brightness of the sun crescent wouldn't allow something like that. Also, if the dark disk of the moon was partially visible, the solar corona would also be visible on that side. At a maximum eclipse magnitude of 0.9736 i don't think it is possible in any way.

g09062

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by g09062 » Tue Sep 06, 2016 10:48 pm

Honestly I wonder why this picture is still up even if the description was modified. When I go to APOD's website, I expect to see a wonderful astropicture taken by a talented astrophotographer who spent money, time and energy to get this single shot, not a computer artist.

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8999
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by geckzilla » Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:35 pm

g09062 wrote:Honestly I wonder why this picture is still up even if the description was modified. When I go to APOD's website, I expect to see a wonderful astropicture taken by a talented astrophotographer who spent money, time and energy to get this single shot, not a computer artist.
Computer artistry is fine. Illustrations are fine, too. Anything that manages to convey a scientific idea and is supported by reality is fine. APOD is not all about astrophotography. This picture is just closer to fantasy than it is reality, unfortunately.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 14612
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Chris Peterson » Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:50 pm

geckzilla wrote:
g09062 wrote:Honestly I wonder why this picture is still up even if the description was modified. When I go to APOD's website, I expect to see a wonderful astropicture taken by a talented astrophotographer who spent money, time and energy to get this single shot, not a computer artist.
Computer artistry is fine. Illustrations are fine, too. Anything that manages to convey a scientific idea and is supported by reality is fine. APOD is not all about astrophotography. This picture is just closer to fantasy than it is reality, unfortunately.
That's the thing. Who cares how much processing and artistry went into creating an image? I just want it to clearly illustrate a point. It should not misrepresent reality in such a way that you end up misunderstanding that point. And that's all.

What I don't like about this image is that it doesn't demonstrate any clear scientific point, and neither is it even close to the impression a visual observer experiences with an eclipse like this. So while it might look great in a frame, sold at an art show, it seems a bit out of place for APOD.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Elias Chasiotis
Ensign
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:59 am

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by Elias Chasiotis » Wed Sep 07, 2016 9:03 am

g09062 wrote:Honestly I wonder why this picture is still up even if the description was modified. When I go to APOD's website, I expect to see a wonderful astropicture taken by a talented astrophotographer who spent money, time and energy to get this single shot, not a computer artist.
I completely agree. This photo was not submitted as a computer artistry image, but as a telephoto composite, which means composition of real photographs. So, computer artistry is not fine when it is presented as real photography.
In the APOD submissions webpage there is the following ethics statement:
"Ethics statement: APOD accepts composited or digitally manipulated images, but requires them to be identified as such and to have the techniques used described in a straightforward, honest and complete way".
The truth is that the selection of this specific image has raised a lot of doubt amongst amateur astrophotographers, even lots of ironic and sarcastic responses.

User avatar
owlice
Guardian of the Codes
Posts: 8356
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 4:18 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: APOD: Reunion Island Eclipse (2016 Sep 03)

Post by owlice » Thu Sep 08, 2016 2:04 pm

Elias Chasiotis wrote:
g09062 wrote:Honestly I wonder why this picture is still up even if the description was modified. When I go to APOD's website, I expect to see a wonderful astropicture taken by a talented astrophotographer who spent money, time and energy to get this single shot, not a computer artist.
I completely agree. This photo was not submitted as a computer artistry image, but as a telephoto composite, which means composition of real photographs. So, computer artistry is not fine when it is presented as real photography.
In the APOD submissions webpage there is the following ethics statement:
"Ethics statement: APOD accepts composited or digitally manipulated images, but requires them to be identified as such and to have the techniques used described in a straightforward, honest and complete way".
The truth is that the selection of this specific image has raised a lot of doubt amongst amateur astrophotographers, even lots of ironic and sarcastic responses.
Elias, I was not aware that you are privy to the private correspondence between APOD editors and submitters. Interesting.
A closed mouth gathers no foot.