Want this question answered?
The photograph would record far more stars, nebulae, and galaxies than the naked eye could see. There are many thousands of such photographs to be seen on the web. Any camera capable of long exposures with an equatorial mount and a clock drive could create such a photograph. A clock drive, which turns the right ascension axis of the mount at the speed of a hour hand (hence the name), counteracts the rotation of the Earth.
On the outside, they have more sun exposure, which may increase levels of melanin or other natural colouring.
It is called the Polaris.
The only time the moon is yellow is when it's close to the earth's horizon. The reason the moon looks yellow is because the light from the moon passes through the haze and smog in the earth's atmosphere. As the moon rises in the sky, it passes through less haze and regains it's greyish color. The true unfiltered color of the moon is grey. Photographers determine the coloer of the moon in their photographs by the variying exposure they use. A short exposure adds color to photographs. A longer exposure "washes out" colors and makes them appear whiter, or in the case of the moon, grey.
This is because the Pole Star (i.e. Polaris, in the Northern hemisphere) is within a degree of the Earth's centre of rotation. That is, the north pole is in line with this particular star. Thus, as the Earth rotates, Polaris does not appear to move in the sky, and the rest of the stars appear to revolve around it.
The stars would be brighter points of light. Without the Earth's rotation, the Earth would not be moving enough to create the lines of light that ordinarily appear in an uncorrected stationary time exposure. Depending on the clarity of the sky, the entire image could be grayed by scattered light (light pollution).
The stars would be brighter points of light. Without the Earth's rotation, the Earth would not be moving enough to create the lines of light that ordinarily appear in an uncorrected stationary time exposure. Depending on the clarity of the sky, the entire image could be grayed by scattered light (light pollution).
This answer depends on the location of the camera taking the picture. If the camera is on the ground, then the exposure would come out clearer if the camera was not mounted on a system that could automatically move the lens. If the camera was in LEO (Low Earth Orbit) it wouldn't matter if the earth was rotating.
The length of time required to photograph star trails varies depending on how long you would like the trails to appear. Generally, with a 10 minute exposure, you will have very faint trails. With a one hour exposure, you will have trails roughly four times as long. With a 180 minute exposure, you will have trails that are substantially longer, and will noticeably fill the picture. The longer the exposure, the more white the picture will become as it is filled with star trails.
I read that he actually broke his leg in real life, so it was not scripted and does not appear in the movie. http://home.comcast.net/~mcnotes/corbinbreaksleg.html
The photograph would record far more stars, nebulae, and galaxies than the naked eye could see. There are many thousands of such photographs to be seen on the web. Any camera capable of long exposures with an equatorial mount and a clock drive could create such a photograph. A clock drive, which turns the right ascension axis of the mount at the speed of a hour hand (hence the name), counteracts the rotation of the Earth.
Typically, people/animals/things that appear unexpectedly in a photograph.
4
they appear in the northern lights area in the north pole
No. Not unless the symptoms appear.
Northern Hemisphere
OVER EXPOSURE - too bright, the image would result to being whiter than normal. UNDER EXPOSURE - too dark, the image would likely to appear black