use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g.reddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
reddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, community...
Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -Carl Sagan
You might also enjoy:
r/starparty
r/astronomy
r/cosmology
r/spaceporn
r/astrophys
r/aerospace
r/nasa
r/spaceflight
/r/spacemusic
reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›
A comet in the middle (apod.nasa.gov)
submitted 28 days ago by ssommer01
[–]Garrettishere 47 points48 points49 points 28 days ago
This is comet McNaught, or the Great Comet of 2007. It's actually only a three photograph panorama. Awesome shot, thanks for sharing.
[–]kibitzor -4 points-3 points-2 points 28 days ago*
Although this is an awesome photo, it's not exactly what I want to be seeing in /r/space
*edit
I'm referring to the original shot submitted by ssommer01.
Please don't downvote, rather, ask questions and start a discussion!
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 28 days ago
... why?
[–]HungryMoblin 2 points3 points4 points 28 days ago
I think he was talking about the one ssommer01 posted, and probably because only a small fraction of it has to do with space. I might be wrong, but I don't really have a lot to go off of. I personally don't mind it as long as it's got something to do with space.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 28 days ago
Either way, both images are of objects in space, just taken from Earth. Why is this not where they should go?
[–]feureau 4 points5 points6 points 28 days ago
It's been raised that /r/space should be the space equivalent of /r/science or maybe r/askscience, that is to discuss the scientific and engineering topics pertaining to space. While pictures like these should go to r/spaceporn.
I'm still undecided on the issue. Besides, I think it's a non-issue anyway.
Maybe we should seek council from the great Neil DeGrasse Tyson over at the temple of twitter
[–]Garrettishere 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago
My take on the whole /r/spaceporn vs. /r/space (basically where images are posted) debacle goes something like this:
Clearly, people in /r/space are interested in this stuff as it's gotten 1300+ upvotes w/ 3/4 of the people liking it. There are no rules posted by the mods as to what is posted in /r/space so as long as the subscribers are enjoying it, I don't see a problem with it.
Reddit is very much a democracy and, as is typical with a democracy, the majority is and always will be winning.
[–][deleted] 27 days ago
[deleted]
[–]kibitzor 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago
It's tough to get people to discuss what they don't like.
[–]Ezrado 27 points28 points29 points 28 days ago
Jesus that was some lucky timing. I understand it's quite a long exposure, but still...
[–]celidee 30 points31 points32 points 28 days ago
This is a composite of many images stitched together from the day. I forgot where I read it but its not a single capture.
[–]hvusslax 22 points23 points24 points 28 days ago
I think there would be no way to catch the bright flash of a lighting and the much fainter comet in the sky in a single picture, no camera has that kind of dynamic range.
[–]Saganomics 6 points7 points8 points 28 days ago
This shot should be quite possible with some careful post-processing to recover shadow and highlight detail. It helps that it's a 3-frame panorama - he could vary the exposure slightly from left to right and then mask off the beach and adjust its exposure to be equal all the way across later.
[–]DeskFlyer 11 points12 points13 points 28 days ago
You probably read about it here. The photographer's page can be found here.
[–]MrOrdinary 1 point2 points3 points 28 days ago
I couldn't get that lucky in a thousand years of Sundays.
[–]flightsin 9 points10 points11 points 28 days ago
Largest version I could find (1744x600). Still not enough for a multi-monitor wallpaper, unfortunately.
[–]zjbird 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago
I use two monitors at 1920 x 1080 resolution. Two questions...first off, where can I find images that would look good with two monitors, and second, how do I get my (windows) desktop to stretch onto both monitors and not just put the same image on each monitor? None of the settings seem to do this for me (fill, fit, stretch, center).
[–]Melloverture -1 points0 points1 point 27 days ago
Multi Monitor Wallpaper
Assuming you have windows 7:
[–]mspong 2 points3 points4 points 28 days ago
I was inspired to look for a source of information on comets currently visible, and found http://www.aerith.net/comet/weekly/current.html Note that magnitude is an inverse scale, low numbers are brighter than high ones.
One interesting comet, C/2011 L4 ( PanSTARRS ), is predicted to be magnitude -1 naked-eye comet next year.
[–]bluedays 4 points5 points6 points 28 days ago
Someone mind linking to the apod page instead of direct linking to the image?
[–]tyme 4 points5 points6 points 28 days ago
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080705.html
[–]MrHall 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago
.. and that page links the original artist, who probably deserves credit: http://www.jkemppainen.com/antti/ancient/
[–]vorticalbeans 8 points9 points10 points 28 days ago
Is this real life?
[–]tyrroi 4 points5 points6 points 28 days ago
I think the images are real but photoshoped together.
[–]YesNoMaybe -13 points-12 points-11 points 28 days ago
Or is this just fantasy?
[–]kurtu5 4 points5 points6 points 28 days ago
I was going to upvote you for funny, but sadly there is no funny filter. People read r/space to learn things that they never saw before. Time is valuable. If I could toggle "show funny comments" then no problemo. But alas that feature doesn't exist.
In r/images, I would have upvoted you immediately. But I am reminded of a recent META discussion about r/space, and how they begged for people to keep it cutting edge and serious.
It should stay serious, Elon is going to retire on mars! I don't want r/space to become some half assed discussion of this endeavour, but one of the canonical places where even SpaceX engineers come to give news and updates.
Sorry for the long winded explanation why people seem so anti humor.
[–]YesNoMaybe 0 points1 point2 points 28 days ago
Honestly, "is this real life" was begging for that response. I couldn't not do it...regardless of the subreddit.
[–]yokobono 1 point2 points3 points 28 days ago
One would think that less sphincter tension is required in space due to the lack of gravity, however observation appears to prove the opposite is true.
[–]kurtu5 1 point2 points3 points 27 days ago
I could barely resist upvoting it. :) But think of the mission!
[–]hothrous -8 points-7 points-6 points 28 days ago
Caught in an image slide?
[–]daren_sf -5 points-4 points-3 points 28 days ago
Memorex FTW!
[–]nobammer420 1 point2 points3 points 28 days ago
There's proof o ghosts in this pic.
[–]karmaisdharma 1 point2 points3 points 28 days ago
Fireworks lightning and comets - OH MY
[–]tellu2 1 point2 points3 points 27 days ago
This can't be real...that's way to much awesome for one photo.
[–]ratamac 0 points1 point2 points 28 days ago
if not shopped - that's excellent!
[–]coolwebsitebro 0 points1 point2 points 28 days ago
Very atmospheric.
[–]lunar_aurora 0 points1 point2 points 28 days ago
Clusterfuck of amazing.
[–]yoolee 0 points1 point2 points 28 days ago
This photo is gorgeous.
[–]NightSlatcher -22 points-21 points-20 points 28 days ago*
Lovely, but not real, image.
Edit: Direct quote from NASA:
The above image is actually a three photograph panorama digitally processed to reduce red reflections from the exploding firework.
So it's digitally stitched together and altered on a computer, as in not a real image. But hey, downvote the truth, it's only a science subreddit after all. No wonder reddit is continually eating up Bullshit with a spoon.
[–]Saganomics 30 points31 points32 points 28 days ago
No, it's real - unless you've unilaterally decided that panoramas aren't real.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd 10 points11 points12 points 28 days ago
It's a composite of three separate real events. As a single image it is not real. It implies these events happened concurrently. They did not. It was three photographs combined into one. In other words, it isn't a real photograph. He's not claiming the events didn't happen, he's explaining that what you see above did not happen in a single frame.
[–]demidyad -2 points-1 points0 points 28 days ago
They did happen concurrently. This was the Australia Day celebrations in Perth, whilst a storm was passing through.
I was there.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd 5 points6 points7 points 28 days ago
But the photograph didn't capture them all at once. That is the point. It is three different points in time combined into a single fake photo.
[–]demidyad 5 points6 points7 points 28 days ago
They may be separated by a few seconds, as all panoramas are. But anybody there did see all three of those things at once, so this photograph is an accurate representation of the scene.
And that will be the end of my discussion on the semantics of whether or not a given photograph is 'real'.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -2 points-1 points0 points 28 days ago
It's not a real photograph. It is a composite. Do you understand what a composite is? It is a few photographs made into one. I could set my camera up, take a photo of me in one couch, then the other, and finally the chair and combine them into a composite image and would you claim it was a real image? You'd have to be insane to. Just like that, this is a fake image.
[–]fletch44 7 points8 points9 points 27 days ago
Every photo of an object in space is a composite built from exposures at different frequencies. Therefore any photo NASA publishes is not a real photo.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -5 points-4 points-3 points 27 days ago
Exactly.
[–]outwrangle 2 points3 points4 points 27 days ago
Therefore, the moon landing was faked.
Checkmate, astronauts.
[–]phyrah -4 points-3 points-2 points 28 days ago
The second you open it up in Photoshop it becomes fake. There has to be some definite adding of some saturation in there. Thus making it not the truth.
[–]disconcision 6 points7 points8 points 27 days ago
the second you involve a camera it becomes fake. photography != reality.
[–]NightSlatcher -60 points-59 points-58 points 28 days ago
You fucking asshole, that's not what I said one bit. A direct quote from the NASA page
So yeah, it's digitally stitched together. Fake, in other words. Fuck you, do some research next time.
[–]Saganomics 48 points49 points50 points 28 days ago
Ah, so you have unilaterally decided that panoramas aren't real. And you're really really hopping mad about it. I see.
[–]NightSlatcher -51 points-50 points-49 points 28 days ago*
No, you're just a fucking troll. I never said a panorama isn't a real image. A stitched together, digitally altered panorama isn't real. Like I said, actually look up what you're saying next time.
Edit: You'd think someone with Sagan in their username would have enough respect for the man to not say shit when you don't know what you're talking about. I don't think Carl ever advocated letting your brain rest while your mouth (or in this case fingers) keeps talking.
[–]Saganomics 36 points37 points38 points 28 days ago
I'm gonna blow your mind: every image you've ever seen from Hubble or the Mars Rovers is a stitched panorama (is there any other kind?) with altered colours and levels. Here's a lovely video demonstrating how it's done. You can unrustle your jimmies now.
[–]NightSlatcher -48 points-47 points-46 points 28 days ago
I fucking know that you fucking idiot, who doesn't? The images produced with false-color etc. are also not "real" images, but most people are aware that they are digital creations. This photo is being portrayed as an authentic image with no context given. So I pointed it out as not real, and you jumped on me for not believing it's real. Give it up.
Edit: I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm right, you're being pedantic, and then you get surprised when you say I'm blatantly lying. So stop trolling please.
[–]Saganomics 33 points34 points35 points 28 days ago*
Of course they're real. A digital creation is creating something from nothing, this is just a composite. Altering the colour balance to remove a red cast doesn't make an image fake. Stitching three images together to make a wider image doesn't make it fake. What you're seeing is what was really there at that point in time in that place - cameras don't capture things perfectly and often the final image needs some adjustment to accurately represent what the photographer saw. In fact, even straight out of the camera, a JPG photo meets your definition of fake - a camera has to do demosaicing, sharpening, levels, colour correction, distortion correction, chromatic aberration removal... The list goes on.
[–]NightSlatcher -39 points-38 points-37 points 28 days ago
Digitally altered =/= real. Plain and simple, it's been altered, it's no longer authentic. It doesn't have to be a crazy photoshop painting for it to be a digital creation. I'm not saying it's a worse image for it, I'm merely saying it's impossible to take a picture like that in real life, and it is impossible, the colors and light wouldn't allow it. This is real to the extent that an airbrushed model in a magazine or a sign with a picture Bush sporting the Hitler mustache are real. By calling this image real and authentic, you open the floodgates to all sorts of altered images being "real."
[–]bighunt16 28 points29 points30 points 28 days ago
By your logic, all photographs would be considered fake.
[–]Saganomics 23 points24 points25 points 28 days ago
No, you really don't. For reference, I'm a photographer - we have very strict standards on what's going too far and although there is some disagreement, I can't think of a single photographer who would judge this image to be fake, and they can be some of the harshest critics on that sort of thing. The dynamic range in this photo isn't so wide that it's inconceivable to capture it all, and nothing was added in after the fact. He adjusted what was there.
I think maybe you aren't understanding how photography works after you've pressed the shutter button (I'm not trying to be antagonistic or condescending, promise). A camera doesn't see things the way the eye does, it has to be processed. This was true back in the film days when a photo would be adjusted in the darkroom, and this is true now when it's done in Photoshop. Look up stuff like demosaicing for more info.
[–]persiyan 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago
Um, no. And you lost, just give it up, you don't understand what you're talking about. Now, go to bed and cry about how horrible Reddit was to you today.
[–]RoamingLoser 2 points3 points4 points 28 days ago
You are really overreacting. Your jimmied are so rustle they're up your ass
[–]U_JUST_GOT_DOWNVOTED -5 points-4 points-3 points 28 days ago
Oh hey, there you are. I was looking for you.
[–]nefthep 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago
One thing I've learned on reddit is that people will downvote anything they do not like, regardless if it is truth or not. A lot of people just can't handle the truth -- they would rather have their false, but entertaining and understandable reality be the truth.
[–]nefthep -1 points0 points1 point 27 days ago
See?
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -18 points-17 points-16 points 28 days ago
I read all of the replies in this little thread of yours and I upvoted every one of your comments. While you did overreact a bit, you're not wrong. This isn't a real photograph. It is a composite photograph, but it was certainly not all captured at once. In other words, all of these things shown did not happen concurrently. Actually they may have, but this isn't a photo of it. This is a photo of three separate events. It's like taking a picture of yourself in your couch, in your chair, and standing beside your chair, combining them into a single image, and claiming that it was a real image. It just isn't.
Queue the downvotes.
The only people with their jimmies rustled here are the people who think the above image is real.
[–]FreakingScholastic 8 points9 points10 points 27 days ago
If you want to take things to absurd lengths, you could say that any picture isn't real because light takes time to travel, so more distant objects are seen in the past. Alternately, you could point out that a camera shutter is open for a non-instant amount of time, which means any photo is taking a composite of different times, blended together.
At some point, you have to decide that something is real enough, and not get bogged down in the semantics.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -8 points-7 points-6 points 27 days ago
No, that's being ridiculous. However this isn't a real photo. It is three separate photos edited into one. It is not a real photograph.
[–]fletch44 1 point2 points3 points 27 days ago
No, it's like standing on a hilltop lookout and taking a picture to your left, straight ahead, and to your right all within seconds of each other.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -4 points-3 points-2 points 27 days ago
Right. If you presented each of those three photos separately, they would be real photos (unedited). Since this photo is a combination of three edited photos, it is not a real photo.
[–]chalkycandy 2 points3 points4 points 27 days ago
Oh, do they have to be single-file now?
[–]dubsideofmoon 1 point2 points3 points 27 days ago
I just got into the upvote queue for your comment.
[–]persiyan 0 points1 point2 points 27 days ago*
Judging by the amount of light movement captured they were relatively short exposures of a second or less, so the pictures were taken within or less than 10 seconds. So this is exactly what the scenery looked like, aside from colors of course but no camera can capture the exact colors as we see them. The only credible criticism you can give this photo with regard to not being real is that since they are different exposures the lighting and the fireworks did not happen at the same time, however, there is nothing about this photo that isn't real or didn't look as it is in this photo.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -2 points-1 points0 points 27 days ago
It's a composite image. It's not a real photograph.
Thanks for the downvote, all the while crying about people downvoting you.
Define a real photograph, what is real about a photograph that isn't real about a panoramic photograph? It's 2 or more "real" photos taken side by side and after that put together, is it not? Why are 2 or more "real" photos put together not real, but one photo is?
Who is crying about downvotes beside you? A real photograph doesn't require photoshop to be made. That's usually a good indicator if you're unsure.
Ok, that didn't answer any of the questions I asked. You have failed to convince me that this isn't a real representation of the actual scenery on that day from that exact spot during those few seconds in between those three exposures. In other words you actually don't know what you're talking about and don't know how panoramic photos are made.
[–]lurker_becomes_lurkd -6 points-5 points-4 points 27 days ago
To the contrary, you have no capacity to differentiate between a real photograph and a fake. I will produce the composite image of my sitting on both of my couches and my chair and blow your mind. You'll be convinced I am a triplet.
[–]Slytherbot3 -7 points-6 points-5 points 27 days ago
You should know that SubredditDrama hаs written about yоu.
Argument over what a real image actually is
As of now, your comment has a score of -27 (26|53). The submission has a score of 1240 (1749|509).
Although SRD officially bans coordinated voting, threads lіnked by them have a tendency to suddenly acquire disprоportionatеly large amounts of votes, as well as derаiling comments directed at thоse ЅRD decides is in the wrong.
[–]GQ4U -1 points0 points1 point 27 days ago
I looked at this picture while tripping and it was incredible. Even sober it's still incredible
[–]Havuk8888 -1 points0 points1 point 27 days ago
Where did you take this? Just beautiful, photo shop or not.
all it takes is a username and password
create account
is it really that easy? only one way to find out...
already have an account and just want to login?
login
[–]Garrettishere 47 points48 points49 points ago
[–]kibitzor -4 points-3 points-2 points ago
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]HungryMoblin 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]feureau 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]Garrettishere 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–]kibitzor 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Ezrado 27 points28 points29 points ago
[–]celidee 30 points31 points32 points ago
[–]hvusslax 22 points23 points24 points ago
[–]Saganomics 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]DeskFlyer 11 points12 points13 points ago
[–]MrOrdinary 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]flightsin 9 points10 points11 points ago
[–]zjbird 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Melloverture -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]mspong 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]bluedays 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]tyme 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]MrHall 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]vorticalbeans 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–]tyrroi 4 points5 points6 points ago
[–]nobammer420 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]karmaisdharma 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]tellu2 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]ratamac 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]coolwebsitebro 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]lunar_aurora 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]yoolee 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]GQ4U -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]Havuk8888 -1 points0 points1 point ago