Quote:
Originally Posted by avatorotava
I am sorry man, but something isn't quite convincing here..
I don't do any maths but I am a professional photographer and
...
|
I assume that your native tongue is not English and therefore something may have been lost in the translation?
I’m also not sure that claiming to be a professional photographer (simply means one who is paid to take photographs) is a justifiable qualification to do away with the need to apply mathematical rigour to the data captured in Chris’s photo, before making such unnecessary and quite pointless comments.
Amateur astronomers (unpaid; doing it for the love of their hobby) perform many simple mathematical calculations to characterize the field of view of their instruments and photographic systems. There is no (data driven) conflict here between the apparent angular sizes of the Moon’s disc and the airplane as recorded through a Vixen ED103S F/7.7 refractor fitted with a Canon 450D. The lighting appears as expected to those who have viewed the Moon under similar twilight conditions. The small amount of motion blur of the airframe, based on the apparent field of view, aircraft altitude/distance/ground speed seems appropriate based upon the author’s published exposure details of 1/250 second.
Sometimes, you just have to trust data rather than an opinion based on, well in this instance, I don’t know what!
Cheers
Dennis
PS – Chris, I would ignore there naysayer posts, you cannot have an open conversation with a closed mind. You know what you recorded, and how, and you don’t require any other justification to prove the authenticity of this amazing image.