Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Full Moon by Galileo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Full Moon by Galileo[edit]

I was helping a couple of friends with thier finals studies at the library when we passed by a young lady's computer and I spotted this spectacular image. That was at five this afternoon, now that I have finally have a free moment from studying it occurs to me that this may be an excellent candidate for FP, so here it is. This was taken by the Galileo spacecraft on December 7, 1992 on its way to explore the Jupiter system in 1995-97. The distinct bright ray crater at the bottom of the image is the Tycho impact basin. The dark areas are lava rock filled impact basins: Oceanus Procellarum (on the left), Mare Imbrium (center left), Mare Serenitatis and Mare Tranquillitatis (center), and Mare Crisium (near the right edge). This picture contains images through the Violet, 756 nm, 968 nm filters. The color is 'enhanced' in the sense that the CCD camera is sensitive to near infrared wavelengths of light beyond human vision. It is a PD image from the commons, from NASA (ok, that was a gimme :-), and appears in the article Full moon.

  • Nominate and Support TomStar81 (Talk) 10:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment There is something unnatural about the color of this picture. What about the purple stripe that comes down from the upper left side? Alvesgaspar 12:50, 5 December 2006 (UTC)~
  • Weak oppose. Overall it's pretty good, but it seems somewhat blurry, and the cropping is too tight for my liking. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 14:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A picture like this should be perfect, unfortunately, this one isn't. --Janke | Talk 14:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose It's a nice photo and we should have a moon photo, but there are jagged bits around the ege, and like PH said the cropping is too tight. ps; I noticed we had a full moon last night, coincidence? --Bridgecross 14:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Support There are definetly artifacts, but it does not appear to be something that could be easily retaken. The runner-up shots I found were Image:Moon-Mdf-2005.jpg and Image:Moon-Mdf-2005.jpg, and the clarity on this one is superior to those. Perhaps someone more familiar with astronomy could confirm or deny whether this is in fact the best image there is?
  • Oppose. This was cropped by a sharp circular mask sending enc down the drain. (A shot like this can even be taken [from earth], apart from the angle) --Dschwen 16:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Massive what appears to be stitching errors. Color is weird. I searched the CC section of flickr, and couldn't find any suitable images. Searching google, I found these which are all most likely not free [1], [2], and [3]. These images illustrate that it is possible to get a better image, though you need some special equipment. Here is a remarkable NASA image, but it isn't a full moon (and there are jaggies on the edge of the moon) [4]. Finally, I came across an image of the far side of the moon [5], which I think is quite fascinating. Now that is something that we simply cannot retake.--Andrew c 16:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There are definitely better ones out there. --Tewy 01:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - the odd colors may have to do with the filters set used to make the image, but the circular mask noticed by Dschwen ruins its credibility. Debivort 06:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Well done, Dschwen, for noticing the circular clipping. For those who don't know what Dschwen meant, have a look at the bottom of the image. There should be a non-smooth edge because of craters, but it's perfectly smooth - Adrian Pingstone 10:43, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose A lot of aliasing, plus the "real" shot is very ugly- shots from earth are much more beautiful — Preceding unsigned comment added by froth (talkcontribs)
    • All the more reason the image would be encyclopedic, don't you think? TomStar81 (Talk) 15:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Agree with Tomstar that the "ugliness" may actually be interesting scientific data not attainable form earth ... but stupid edge cropping. I wonder why they did that. Debivort 18:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Possibly because these pictures weren't all taken directly like this, but in fact from a variety of angles, and were mapped onto a sphere later? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 11:26, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose You can find much better pictures of the moon here on Wikipedia and elsewhere. Sharkface217 19:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Not promoted Raven4x4x 07:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)