dsjtecserv

Lives in United States Northern, VA, United States
Works as a Technical Director
Joined on Jan 21, 2005

dsjtecserv's recent activity

  • Correct; if this was taken yesterday, 8/24, the moon rose over NYC at 11:08 p.m. Dave
  • Replied in I vote fake
    According to the information given in the article and by a fellow above, it was at 600 mm with a 1.4 extender, or 840 mm. Plus it may have been cropped to some degree as well. Dave
  • Replied in I vote fake
    Have you viewed the scene from 25 miles away before? Really? A building the size of the World Trade Center? Dave
  • Understood. it is an unusual shot and not something we are used to seeing with our eyes. And sadly, then have been cases where people have shamelessly composited huge images of the moon over ...
  • And you did that without reading a word of all the comments above? Dave
  • Well, since you evidently believe that nothing is possible unless you have experienced it, perhaps you should take a trip out to Plainfield NJ, and see what you can find. You might surprise yourself! ...
  • Lots and lots of pictures have been taken over great distances with usable resolution. There's nothing at all remarkable about that. And the lack of definition of the buildings in the image is ...
  • Sigh. Please read what I've explained earlier. The size relationships are entirely the result of the viewing location. The size relationships represents what is seen of one particular location, ...
  • How do you know that? Have you ever viewed the skyline from 25 miles away? The moon can be ANY size, relative to things in front of it, if the spacial relationships are correct. Consider this: no ...
  • Perfect example, Justin! Dave
  • Well it is also capturing the moon at 239,000 miles -- some lens indeed! In fact, you can see the quality of the image if affected by atmospheric distortion and probably by pretty strong cropping. ...
  • Please read what I wrote, and the further evidence that I just posted below. The relative size of foreground and background objects is entirely a function of the vantage point -- how far away the ...
  • OK, so I did a quick survey using the Photographer's Ephemeris and Google Maps. Assuming this was taken Tuesday 8/24, the moon rose at that location at 23:08 at 73.5 degrees, basically above Long ...
  • I don't have time to investigate the specific circumstances, but there is absolutely no reason that this couldn't be a real legitimate, non-composite shot. It is simply a matter of distance and ...
  • But sensor size and pixel density are completely independent variables. There is no necessity that a smaller sensor has a greater density. Thus there is no basis for saying that a smaller sensor ...
  • The paper you linked to doesn't discuss the concept of reach. But GB, and the other folks making similar points, are correct here. Reach is not dependent on sensor size, but it is dependent on ...
  • Yes, "slight" would be a misnomer, since it is "zero"! The reach advantage that is legitimately associated with crop sensors is the result of greater pixel density, not the crop factor itself. ...
  • Sharpening and noise reduction always go hand-in-hand, and are best customized for the actual output, in both size and method. The optimum degree of sharpening is affected by the size of the image ...
  • https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58134498 Dave
  • This is a common misconception, even reflected in some of the other responses. To clarify: the "90 degrees to the sun" principle applies only to the effect of the polarizer on blue sky itself. The ...
Activity older than 12 months is not displayed.
Total messages 3118
Threads started 37
Last post 1 hour ago
Total comments 7
Total likes 26
Last post Jun 30, 2015
Total reviews 0
Entries 0
Votes cast 4
Photos uploaded 0