Normal laws of photography do not apply
Space is a fascinating frontier for photography. It was only when I started looking at the new unofficial official ISS photographer, Thomas Pesquet, I noticed that the
basic ‘laws’ of photography do not apply in space. The EXIF data (the data attached to each image) are also interesting as in a sense they are they ‘key’ to the photo.
Pin Sharp Night Shots whilst speeding by? No problem!
On earth, a minimum shutter speed required for a good sharp photo is said to be the reciprocal of the lens length (as a minimum). So, if you have a 400mm lens, the minimum shutter speed should be 1/400th of a second. Common sense would also suggest that if you are moving at 17,000mph whilst floating over a spinning earth, you might want to increase that a touch! Let’s have a look.
Nice crisp image then taken at…….1/20th of a second!
We’re now down to 1/15th of a second and still reasonable! No discernible blur.
Curious that this photo is not significantly darker than the last two given that the ISO value is set to zero. Perhaps this is another anomaly caused by space photography! Roughly 2.3 miles are covered in the duration of the shutter being open and still no blur!
So….we’re now down to 0.3 of a second and still no discernible blurring! And why is the value expressed differently in the EXIF data? This is not the only anomaly! Curious. Moreover, we’re using a 28mm lens, a perfectly ‘terrestrial’ wide angle lens to photograph the earth from 200 miles up! In addition, the low shutter speed plus insanely high ISO could / should give massive overexposure according to earlier variables on the photos above, but no! It looks great.
No monopod? No problem!
This is how monopods (a single legged tripod) are used in conjunction with a telephoto lens on earth. I know what you’re thinking…….they don’t need one the ISS because it’s a weightless environment? Partly correct. The monopod also absorbs or prevents the natural shake from the body that transmits and amplifies down the length of the telephoto barrel, which can cause blur.
Don't spare a thought for the movement of your body, the camera, the ISS hurtling by at 17,000mph and the spinning earth below. Just float and snap away with a focal length up to 1100mm!
ISS style photography. No bracing of the camera, monopod. Just good clean floating photography!
Blurring the boundaries
“Houston. We have a problem”! It’s the old different pylon structures again (first called out by Simon in this thread). Still unashamedly being touted around the place.
Can anybody honestly say that that represents a ‘real’ photography and not ‘digital imagery’?
However, because you see thousands of photos that look ‘correct’ your brain will not call out the anomaly and say,
“Hold on…...what on earth is that”?
If we eventually cannot discern the difference between a photograph and composite or pure digital imagery then we have very big problems indeed. The lie hides in plain sight and the intention I feel is to completely blur those boundaries in order that our perceptions are completely fooled to the point that we remain passive, completely uncritical. This means that future psyops can be less and less impressive with more and more discontinuities, poor storylines, obvious media assets and contradictions and yet…….we will never raise a murmur. I mean look at those arrays! They're absolutely mind numbing.
A photo too far
Incredibly foreground sharpness combined with terrific earth detail also, using the classic photojournalists lens (24-70mm) set to 36mm! Possible? Doubtful.
No wonder Nikon are the official choice for NASA if they can produce imagery like this! Given the competitive nature of Nikon and Canon cameras, it surprises me that Nikon doesn't make more of this incredible relationship between NASA and themselves!
It’s almost as if they play it down! Curious.
(said by an ex semi-pro photographer who, admittedly many years ago, worked with several pros who were all totally obsessed / paranoid about keeping their expensive and delicate equipment out of harm's way. As it is, a mere scratch on those telephoto lenses would be disastrous - yet they let them float around the ISS like children's party balloons?... ).
“...the sixty-fifth flight...” no less...
