Historical first photo of space |
Historical first photo of space |
Jul 23 2011, 11:21 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 20-April 05 Member No.: 267 |
Does anyone know what is regarded as the first photograph
that is space related; the moon, a planet, a star field or whatever it may be and if it can be viewed online someplace? Google was not my friend here. |
|
|
Jul 23 2011, 11:28 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
I'm going to guess that based on the very low sensitivity of film in the earliest days, it's probably the moon, ore else an inadvertent capture of Venus in the background of an image.
Google really is your friend, THE FIRST PHOTO OF THE MOON, 1839 -------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
Jul 23 2011, 11:38 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 20-April 05 Member No.: 267 |
Thanks , it is clearer than anticipated.
|
|
|
Jul 24 2011, 01:04 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Merciless Robot Group: Admin Posts: 8783 Joined: 8-December 05 From: Los Angeles Member No.: 602 |
Dan, thanks! AMAZING photo in so many ways.
Interesting to think of the interpretation of the surface features in that era...makes you wonder what false assumptions WE may apply to more recent imagery of far lesser-understood places. (Titan above all springs to mind; still don't think we're even close to understanding what the hell is going on down there, and that's a good sign that we're going to learn a lot...) -------------------- A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
|
|
|
Jul 24 2011, 04:57 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 903 Joined: 30-January 05 Member No.: 162 |
Not belittling the skill involved in taking the image but I think the sensitivity of the 'film' was perhaps less important than we might suppose. The moon was, after all, directly illuminated by 100% sunlight. Whatever chemistry they used for landscape portraiture would have been sufficient for a 'moon shot'.
|
|
|
Jul 24 2011, 05:22 AM
Post
#6
|
|
Senior Member Group: Admin Posts: 4763 Joined: 15-March 05 From: Glendale, AZ Member No.: 197 |
No one at any point in this discussion indicated it would have been difficult to photograph the moon with the earliest films. My comment about the film's sensitivity was made to rule out objects OTHER THAN the Moon and Venus as the earliest astro-photography target. I can't imagine how I might have worded it to be more clear.
-------------------- If Occam had heard my theory, things would be very different now.
|
|
|
Jul 24 2011, 01:50 PM
Post
#7
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 94 Joined: 22-May 08 From: Loughborough Member No.: 4121 |
This site lists some firsts for the son of John Draper (who took the moon photo)
http://www.saburchill.com/HOS/astronomy/033.html |
|
|
Jul 26 2011, 12:55 AM
Post
#8
|
|
Interplanetary Dumpster Diver Group: Admin Posts: 4404 Joined: 17-February 04 From: Powell, TN Member No.: 33 |
Not belittling the skill involved in taking the image but I think the sensitivity of the 'film' was perhaps less important than we might suppose. The moon was, after all, directly illuminated by 100% sunlight. Whatever chemistry they used for landscape portraiture would have been sufficient for a 'moon shot'. The exposure time (thank you again, Google) was a whopping 20 minutes. -------------------- |
|
|
Jul 27 2011, 04:36 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 87 Joined: 9-November 07 Member No.: 3958 |
This timeline shows the earliest star photographs in 1857 (Mizar and Alcor from the Harvard refractor). The next year saw the first successful comet photograph (the amazingly spectacular Donati). The Orion nebula was registered in 1880, and after that things really took off. (I've used photographs from as far back as 1895 to look for variability of quasars in the fields of galaxies, repeating the exposure using the same telescope, modern emulsions, and filters to approximate the spectral response of old blue-sensitive emulsion plus a silver-on-glass primary mirror).
|
|
|
Jul 28 2011, 12:31 AM
Post
#10
|
|
Interplanetary Dumpster Diver Group: Admin Posts: 4404 Joined: 17-February 04 From: Powell, TN Member No.: 33 |
Interesting, although it has some serious errors. Holden, working for Pickering, as an example, photographed Mars at Lick Observatory from 1888-1892. Pickering was not involved at all in actually taking the images, although he claimed credit in several publications. And Pic du Midi had nothing to do with it.
I did a blog entry on the set some time ago -------------------- |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th April 2024 - 10:30 PM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |