
How I Accidentally Captured the SpaceX Falcon 9 Landing - electriclove
http://petapixel.com/2016/05/18/captured-spacex-falcon-9-landing-front-milky-way/
======
6stringmerc
If the author happens by to read this, I wanted to maybe offer a bit of help
with some of the 'in the field' frustration noted:

> _This time of year is sea turtle season in the southeast and the threatened
> turtles that come up on the beach to lay their eggs (and any little ones
> that hatch) are highly sensitive to light and often get turned around and
> disoriented by lights on the beach. For that reason, South Carolina (and
> presumably other states in the area) has instituted a no lights on the beach
> policy. Luckily there’s enough light pollution that you can at least
> navigate without a problem, but not being able to use a flashlight to help
> with focusing, adjusting camera settings, etc., is a bit of an annoyance._

When I was in Costa Rica seeing endangered sea turtles doing their thing, the
local guides used red bulbs because they were not disorienting to the sea
turtles. Noise from the tourist group was killing me I gotta say but hey I was
along for the ride in this case. Can say I learned the red light thing.

So I looked up real quick and found some info and links from a South Carolina
conservation group. They state the ordinance reads that "disruptive lights"
are forbidden. Then they had a link to a site of 'certified' bulbs for use
around wildlife. Red is one of the main colors featured:

[http://myfwc.com/conservation/you-
conserve/lighting/certifie...](http://myfwc.com/conservation/you-
conserve/lighting/certified/bulbs/)

Thus, using a red light may be okay under the spirit and way the ordinance(s)
are written, but calling ahead might be a good idea too.

~~~
JoblessWonder
That page seems to targeted to builders/developers. All of the pages say
something along the lines of "Must be mounted recessed under steps, bar, etc.
and directed down to assure that light source or reflected light is not
visible from beach."

I think they are pretty strict about it. It seems like there should be no
light at all.

Edit: Maybe this would work though?[1] Either way, I agree with your advice to
call ahead.

[1] [http://www.turtlesafeonline.com/](http://www.turtlesafeonline.com/)

------
eganist
I'm not a photography buff by any stretch, so I'm probably flagrantly abusing
some language here, but I feel an HDR timelapse of this shot
([http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2016/05/zgrether_spacex_...](http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2016/05/zgrether_spacex_07-800x535.jpg))
would probably be more beautiful than the end result
([http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2016/05/zgrether_spacex_...](http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2016/05/zgrether_spacex_01_and_13-800x534.jpg))
if only because my brain is jarred by the conflict of a timelapsed landing
with a still shot of the stars.

Both are beautiful in any case.

~~~
maxerickson
The detail in the final shot comes from pulling together the details captured
over time.

I guess with lots of messing about the less detailed region around the lander
could be superimposed over the more detailed star field, but it would be even
more synthetic.

~~~
eganist
So I guess what I meant to convey by that is that the first shot I linked
looks overexposed. The second shot I linked superimposed the booster over an
unmoving star field.

I gave it a fuller read and saw why this turned out to be the case (Lighten on
29 out of 30 layers in Photoshop to achieve the star trail effect). Since he
has 30 frames to work with, he has enough data to create the same ultra-long-
exposure effect without it looking overexposed. Probably just more Photoshop
fiddling, really.

------
cooper12
Wow it's astounding how much work can go into processing an image. I think he
brings up an interesting point when he says he was interested in telling a
story rather than depicting reality. Makes one think twice about all those
beautiful nature and space shots they see.

~~~
sliverstorm
Learning photography teaches me that we don't see reality, anyway. Or at the
very least, cameras don't see what we see.

An easy example is your area of attention. Look at a distant deer in a meadow,
you see a deer. Take a photo, and you get a meadow with a speck that might be
a deer.

I want to see what the photographer saw, or saw in their mind's eye, not the
grid-array of photons that struck their retina.

Edit: also, astrophotography starts to veer into camera-as-instrument, where
you are capturing data invisible to the human eye. You process that data like
any other science experiment, and prepare it for visual inspection...

------
neiled
The stars sure are beautiful.

~~~
QuantumRoar
Also terrifying.

~~~
jacobush
And falling. Pink stars are falling.

~~~
night815
I never finished watching Season 3...

("Pink stars are falling" is a reference to Under the Dome)

~~~
jacobush
Pretty decent ending. Could have been much worse. The calcification thing is
silly don't dwell on it.

------
uberdog
I personally like this animated gif that SpaceX tweeted better than the static
image the photographer created:

[https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/733072013858738176](https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/733072013858738176)

~~~
ChrisClark
Yeah, it's in this article too, higher resolution as well if you want to take
a look.

~~~
uberdog
Ah. Duh. I read the original blog post last night and thought it was just the
same thing reposted on another site. I was surprised the animation wasn't
included in the original post.

------
pjungwir
Wow that sure is beautiful, and what luck! Does anyone know what the red flash
was right in the middle, just above the water?

~~~
BurningFrog
Probably the first stage landing.

------
zeiss_otus
Woah! His gear costs around 8k.

Sony Alpha a7R II Mirrorless Digital Camera - 3k Zeiss Otus 28mm f/1.4 ZE Lens
- 5k

Anyone who says you need skills in photography is dead wrong, it's all about
the gear.

------
peterwwillis
Great, now I want to spend $10,000 on cameras to photograph nature.

------
Aelinsaar
That's... so cool. I always love to see the relative motion of celestial
bodies, and with a rocket in the foreground?! My jaw actually dropped a
little.

------
chinathrow
You suck at masking ;)

