wjfox2011
4474
78
3
Credit: Andrew McCarthy
https://twitter.com/AJamesMcCarthy/status/1600749501664612353
Dec 8, 2022 1:53 PM
wjfox2011
4474
78
3
Credit: Andrew McCarthy
https://twitter.com/AJamesMcCarthy/status/1600749501664612353
PinkEater
I thought Mars was a lot bigger. Doesn't look big enough for a Musk colony.
Iaimtomisbehave
I thought that was Mars dodging around the Moon last night. :-)
penut61
That’s a tall ladder
DrDadJokes
how? it make look like Mars is even closer than we perceive it
Easykehl
Here’s a hint: this picture was not taken on/near the moon.
Fridgesavers
That's heckin wicked, man
MrKnowItAll1903
It's a composite. Physics cannot get both in focus at those distances.
DavidBrooker
While it's true that only one plane can be in focus, depth of field grows with distance from the lens. 'Physics' absolutely can get both 1/2
DavidBrooker
in focus at the same time. Indeed, many small aperture devices have such an enormous depth of field (often something like 15cm to 2/3
DavidBrooker
infinity is not uncommon on phone cameras) that the ability to adjust focus is omitted altogether. Any claim about depth of field is 3/4
DavidBrooker
machine specific, *not* a claim of physics. 4/4
thewalkinged
Aren't most photos of things in space composites?
DavidBrooker
'Most' would probably require qualifying a lot of other words in that sentence, but essentially all professional or serious amateur 1/2
DavidBrooker
images of celestial objects are composites. 2/2
thewalkinged
So... Yes?