Can someone help me identify this cosmic structure in this photo?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

AluminumStudios

Senior member
Sep 7, 2001
628
0
0
Can anyone help me identify this? http://www.aluminumstudios.com/lj/night_sky2434.jpg

I was in a rural area which was nice and dark with a perfectly clear sky. I could even see some of the Milky Way with my bare eyes. I aimed my Canon PowerShot A85 straight up at around 11:30PM from my location in Northern PA and took a picture.

The picture was pretty featurless until I brightened it in Photoshop and then I noticed the thing which I put a white square around in the picture. I also enlarged it (in thie picture), but I don't know what it is.

What cosmic structures are visible from Earth like this with low magnification? Could this be a nebula? Are there any comets currently visible?

To the naked eye this thing only looked like a star, it wasn't until I examined this photo that I noticed it.

Any information from someone into astronomy who might know what this is would be greatly appreciated?

EDIT: This image is 1600x1200, please don't let your web browser automatically resize it becasue that makes it look rough and low quality. If your browser does resize it, please click the box in the bottom right corner (IE) or the magnifier cursor on the image (FireFox) to view it at full size.)
 
A

AluminumStudios

Senior member
Sep 7, 2001
628
0
0
I don't think it was a meteor because that was a 15 second exposure. Anything moving would have appeared as a uniform streak where the front end of it would be the the same thickness as the back end.

I forgot to mention in the original post that this was a long (15 second) exposure. That reddish line in the bottom left was actually an airplane that flew by. I think a meteor would produce a similar result.

To me this looks like something in space as opposed to nearby and moving ...
 
sao123

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
Originally posted by: AluminumStudios
I don't think it was a meteor because that was a 15 second exposure. Anything moving would have appeared as a uniform streak where the front end of it would be the the same thickness as the back end.

I forgot to mention in the original post that this was a long (15 second) exposure. That reddish line in the bottom left was actually an airplane that flew by. I think a meteor would produce a similar result.

To me this looks like something in space as opposed to nearby and moving ...
Click to expand...


Could also be a sattelite or space junk reflecting sunlight.
 
A

AluminumStudios

Senior member
Sep 7, 2001
628
0
0
Originally posted by: sao123

Could also be a sattelite or space junk reflecting sunlight.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I don't know enough about astronomy to know if it could be a sattelite or space junk or not. I kind of don't suspect that it is because I've seen ground based photos (without a lot of magnification) of satellites before and they were streaks because they are in motion (orbit). Over the 15 seconds of this exposure this object doesn't show any noticable streaking that you get from moving objects in long exposurs which makes me think it's something pretty far away.
 
sao123

sao123

Lifer
May 27, 2002
12,653
205
106
A sattelight wouldnt move very far in 15 seconds. There is minimal streaking in the photo.

Though I'd need some numbers such as altitude and vector speed to predict an arc path relative to your camera in 25 seconds.
 
D

dcaron

Junior Member
Sep 1, 2005
19
0
0
Originally posted by: AluminumStudios
I don't think it was a meteor because that was a 15 second exposure. Anything moving would have appeared as a uniform streak where the front end of it would be the the same thickness as the back end.

I forgot to mention in the original post that this was a long (15 second) exposure. That reddish line in the bottom left was actually an airplane that flew by. I think a meteor would produce a similar result.

To me this looks like something in space as opposed to nearby and moving ...
Click to expand...

If the meteor was coming almost straight down it might explain the 'short' tail from your particular viewing angle. Maybe as it got closer the 'head' got bigger.
 
Gibsons

Gibsons

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
12,530
35
91
If the meteor exploded or disintergrated during the exposure that might explain why there's a blob rather than just a streak... maybe? ;)

Also, there's a similar looking thing sort of down below the right side of the blown up box. Not as prominent, but a similar color and distended shape. Could also be some distortion from the lens or the digital enhancements.
 
G

Geniere

Senior member
Sep 3, 2002
336
0
0
Originally posted by: AluminumStudios
Can anyone help me identify this? ?
Click to expand...

I am not an astronomer but there seems to be a filament connecting the bright and dimmer points of light. This is more obvious if you look at a ?negative? of your image. If so, it must be a single object. Since there was no apparent motion it must be a distant object and I think we can rule out any thing in the solar system. I believe it is too large (several degrees of sky) to be an exploding star remnant and guess it might an edge on view of a spiral galaxy. If it is smaller than I think it is, it might be M76, the ?Little Dumbbell Nebula? (star remnant).
 
C

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,348
1
81
A comet? Is it still there? If so, the best way to check it out is with a telescope, possibly at a local school's observatory.
 
R

rgwalt

Diamond Member
Apr 22, 2000
7,393
0
0
Originally posted by: sao123
A sattelight wouldnt move very far in 15 seconds. There is minimal streaking in the photo.

Though I'd need some numbers such as altitude and vector speed to predict an arc path relative to your camera in 25 seconds.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you are ever out in a completely dark area (no light pollution, no moon) you will be able to see sattelites. They move at a pretty good clip across the sky.

R
 
A

AluminumStudios

Senior member
Sep 7, 2001
628
0
0
Originally posted by: f95toli
What kind of camera were you using?
Film? Digital?
5.4mm focal length?
Click to expand...


I was using a Canon Powershot A85. 5.4mm was listed in the files EXIF information, although sometimes those numbers seem a little screwy...
 
F

f95toli

Golden Member
Nov 21, 2002
1,547
0
0
5.4 mm would be one hell of a wide-angle lens on a digital camera, I don't think is even possible using a small-sensor camera (I have seen 10x1.6=16 mm)

Anyway, the reason why I ask is that I suspect it might all be just an artifact. Maybe due to an imperfect lens coupled with a very long exposure time (15s at ISO 200 with a consumer compact camera is a bit too long) the picture is pretty noisy and I wouldn't trust anything that appears when you brigthen it.

Try taking picture of e.g a LED and see if you get the same phenomenon.

For taking accurate pictures of the sky you need good optics, a good camera (SLR) and
if you want long exposures film is better than digital (less noise).
 
A

AluminumStudios

Senior member
Sep 7, 2001
628
0
0
Originally posted by: f95toli
5.4 mm would be one hell of a wide-angle lens on a digital camera, I don't think is even possible using a small-sensor camera (I have seen 10x1.6=16 mm)

Anyway, the reason why I ask is that I suspect it might all be just an artifact. Maybe due to an imperfect lens coupled with a very long exposure time (15s at ISO 200 with a consumer compact camera is a bit too long) the picture is pretty noisy and I wouldn't trust anything that appears when you brigthen it.

Try taking picture of e.g a LED and see if you get the same phenomenon.

For taking accurate pictures of the sky you need good optics, a good camera (SLR) and
if you want long exposures film is better than digital (less noise).
Click to expand...


I realize that my camera is not high quality for this type of thing, but it's what I have to work with. It's surprisingly good for a consumer camera. I've done long exposure shots of LEDs before (specifically the machine room at work with all of the lights turned off) and have always had pretty clean results.

Someone on another forum (who really sounded like they knew their astronomy) said that it was a lens flare from the star Vega in the Lyra constellation.

I was hoping to have accidentally captured something more exotic though :-

A high quality DSLR is hopefully in my future. Digital SLRS use larger image sensors and have much less noise (due to larger spacing between the photosites "pixels" on the sensor.)
 
F

f95toli

Golden Member
Nov 21, 2002
1,547
0
0
Exacly, a lens flare is what I had in mind (I just couldn't remember the english term).

Anyway, even with a digital SLR (I own a 350D) taking photos of the sky is difficult du to noise.
Even with high quality cameras you have problems with noise when using long exposure times (30 min-1 hour is not unusual for astronomi photos), I think it is the D70 which has problems with the top left corner of the photo becoming somewhat green is you use really long exposure times, it is apparantly caused by the heat from the battery.

There are ways around this that I guess you could use even with a powershot: "stacking" short exposures, subtracting another picture taken with the lens cap on etc.
 
I

imported_BigT383

Junior Member
Jul 16, 2005
19
0
0
I'm not an astronomer either, but here is my opinion: Satellites orbit at different altitudes. A Satellite in a geosynchronous orbit wouldn't move at all relative to the ground, so not all satellites would leave a trail. Pretty much all objects in space are spinning (including space junk) because there really isn't any good way to lose angular momentum. A lot of satellites are put in spins so that they maintain proper orientation, like a gyroscope. Hubble has 3 gyroscopes (2 of which are currently operating) that work internally (by speeding up or slowing down) to change the telescope's orientation and track subject of the picture as hubble orbits earth, the earth orbits the sun, and the sun orbits the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy. Since satellites aren't spherical, you get sunlight reflecting off of solar panels or other flat surfaces at weird angles. I'll bet this "object" is just the glint off of a rotating satellite or piece of space junk.
 
A

Armitage

Banned
Feb 23, 2001
8,086
0
0
It's not a satellite. By that time at night nothing you could see with that equipment would be sunlit, and even if it was, it would streak in a 15 second exposure. A meteor would also streak signifiacnty in that length of exposure. It's not geosyncronous, as it isn't the right part of the sky - geosync would be to the south. Look at satellite dishes in your area to get a feel for just how far south. But in PA, it isn't anywhere close to "straight up" as described by the OP. I highly doubt you could see a GEO with that equipment anyway.

My guess is that it is some kind of artifact.
 
A

Armitage

Banned
Feb 23, 2001
8,086
0
0
Originally posted by: intangir
Google for "iridium flares".

Btw, I'm a big fan of your AMV's. :)
Click to expand...

To late for an iridium flare - you'll only see those closer to dusk or dawn. The spacecraft has to be sunlit to be flare, and Iridium will not be sunlit at that time of night.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom