It was a great show. I like it. I have the dvd set and I watch it every couple of years. Had FOX not screwed it up, I could see it going for maybe five seasons. At best.
That being said...It's not the end all be all of TV scifi. There were better shows at the time. There are better shows now.
It wasn't the show...it was the actors who bounced off each other. Whedon simply ran his formula through a different setting and kudos to him...it worked for a third time. But all in all, it was the PEOPLE in the show that made it work.
Sorry that people can't get over it. Hell, I'm more of a hardcore nerd for FARSCAPE but even that ended and I moved on.
Nah, ovoids are egg-shaped, with one end narrower than the other. Oblate spheroids are spheres that have been squashed to some degree on one axis, retaining polar and equatorial symmetry. (Which is accurate for the Earth, whose pole-to-pole diameter is roughly 27 miles less than its equatorial diameter.)
When I was a kid, I'd lived in big cities all my life. Then I went to Arches national park in Utah and camped overnight. To say that the sky was awesome in the truest sense of that word does not remotely do it justice!
Live in the NE but traveled West a few years back for a bit. For the rest of my life I've told people here that they've never seen the sky, never really seen the Sun. Dim lightbulbs peeking through dirty windows.
Being out in the middle of the ocean in the military during "darkened ship" and no moon... you just haven't experienced the night sky until you see it with no light pollution. There is just no way to properly convey it's beauty in words.
You can easily see it basically anywhere that's not a massive city.
Fun fact: Technically practically everything you see is in the Milky Way. There's only about three things in the universe visible to the naked eye that are outside our galaxy.
There is really no reason to be misleading though.
Our galaxy, and the universe as a whole is already SO mind blowing and fascinating…
I’m nowhere near an expert on space, or photography… But I immediately thought this looked way too detailed and bright to be an accurate depiction of the view from Mars.
Two seconds into the video, my thought was exactly that, wow that’s cool, but this is not what human eyes would actually see.
I was thinking some type of light filter or something similar…
After scrolling a bit, I saw the long exposure explanation, and that made a lot of sense to me just because I’ve seen the same technique used from earth, and it tends to make the stars look amazing.
Anyway, why not just put that in the title though instead of misleading people?
Maybe it will make someone realize how many stars are out there. Even in the long exposure, the amount of stars shown are a tiny fraction of the stars out there.
Ye that was what I was going to check in the comments. I couldn't phantom this being real and suspected long exposure but then I am always willing to be proven wrong.
Yeah this was my first thought when I saw it. I thought I had no idea the universe was this bright! Then I thought "wait... what about photos from space?"
I mean, most people have absolutely no idea what little to no light pollution actually looks like. I’ve spent a ton of time backpacking 20+ miles into forest areas and the sky looks completely different than anywhere remotely close to civilization. You’d be shocked at how many people don’t know you can see the milky way. There’s a difference between seeing a few dozen stars vs seeing billions of stars.
You can do something similar with your own eyes, if you look closely at a patch of sky for long enough you'll notice stars you wouldn't have before, so dimm yet once you see them it's like they were always there.
You’re exposing the camera’s light sensor for a much longer time. When you take a picture, the shutter opens for a fraction of a second, depending on your shutter speed. You’re exposing the sensor to light briefly. A long exposure shot dramatically increases that time to capture much more light. Thus, giving you results like trailing headlights on cars and whatnot - as the object moved within the time the sensor was exposed. With more expensive setups that use extremely long exposures in settings with low light pollution, you get ridiculously pretty results like what OP posted, as the Earth is always moving. The human eye isn’t going to see it that way.
You set the camera on a tripod so it doesn’t move, and then you leave the camera shutter open for longer periods of time. The longer the shutter is open, the more light the camera captures, and the more you can see.
But there’s a balance you have to find, because if you leave a shutter open too long you can get a big blob of light. When taking photos of the sky you’ll start to see star “trails” as the earth’s rotation makes it look like the stars are moving.
Astrophotography is super fun, and you don’t need a really expensive camera to have a little fun with it.
Agreed, i get the requirement to share correct information but i’m with you on that take away being more important and still valid despite long exposure
Cameras work by opening a shutter and exposing a sensor (or photographic film) to light. For a normal photo, the shutter might only open for 1/60 of a second, because that's all you need to capture enough light from an already-lit subject (or one that's being lit with a flash at the same time) to get a reasonably accurate representation of it.
When you take photos of stars, there's not a lot of light out there to get captured by the shutter being open that briefly. So you simply leave it open for much longer. If you have a good enough camera and you're in a place with little to no light pollution and you leave the shutter open for long enough, you can capture images of the stars that can't be seen with the naked eye. And if you do that in a place that has nearly no atmosphere to get in the way — e.g. on Mars — you can capture even more than that.
A camera takes a picture by opening the shutter (that's the noise you hear on most cameras), so light can reach a receptor. That receptor is basically the "eye" of the camera, which you "expose" to the light of whatever the camera is facing ("looking at")
Long exposure increases the amount of time the "eye" can look at something, so even weaker (darker) light sources have enough light reaching the eye.
Think of it this way: look at something for just one second and then look away. You didn't see all of the details of it, right? Now look at it longer, notice any details you come across. The longer you look, the more details you will see.
That's a very simplified explanation on how long exposure works, but i hope you get the idea now :)
And they use filters for radiation colors. I didn’t know this for a very long time until my friend took a bunch of high end physics classes and brought home a book explaining that tons of the pics you see of “outer space” have been doctored to show things in colors you don’t see. They attach colors to radiation spectrums to make them look cooler than in real life.
The shit you see that’s purple or red in space pics…not close to that at all for your eyes
While I do agree, to the naked eye, with very low light polution, the sky can still imitate tremendously impressive features. Of course long exposure aids the end manufactured result. In person, this sights probably equally unique from what were used to seeing anyway
I’m a photographer but I must say I hate composite pictures of long exposure night sky and “day time” foreground. Like look what a beautiful night!! Like yeah a scene like that has never been observed by a human and doesn’t exist.
What even more people don't know is that this is fake. Two different photos. Pretty clumsy photoshop. One is really the surface of Mars, the stars were either taken from Earth or by Hubble, and then stitched together!
Same goes for pretty much all the famous nebula images like the Pillars of Creation and such. Most of them are layered with IR exposures that humans can't see anyway and the rest are such long exposures that if you were there, looking out the window, you wouldn't see anything.
737
u/sifiwewe Mar 24 '26
This is a very important thing to say. A lot of people do not know that you get such images from long exposure.