Jupiter

.
I usually spend all of my time in the dome taking pictures of the Moon but last night I took a little side trip and photographed the planet Jupiter. It’s not all that great by today’s standards but with our local bad skies (turbulent air) it’s the best that I could do under the circumstances. Also, let’s not forget that although Jupiter is rather large; almost 89,000 miles or about 10 times the size of the Earth, it is also quite far away (last night: 340 million miles).

.

.

Back to the Moon

.
Two more images from Monday night’s session in the dome. Both of these were taken where there were still some shadows, so the craters are more visible. We had another clear night last night and I got some more images but I haven’t had a chance to process them yet. There is a rule of thumb that says for every minute you spend taking pictures through a telescope, you will spend an hour in front of a computer processing them. I have found that to be a pretty good estimate.

.

.

Noon on the Moon

.

Most non-astronomers think that the best time to look at the moon through a telescope is around the time of Full Moon. That’s because they believe that when the moon is big and bright that it must present the best views. Most amateur astronomers on the other hand feel that it is the worst time. That’s because when the sun is shining straight down on the lunar surface there are no shadows, and it is the shadows that bring out the texture and fine details of the moonscape.

On the other hand, I am one of the few amateurs that actually prefer observing the moon when and where there are few or no shadows. I am not as interested in the mountains, hills, and cracks on the surface as I am in the bright or dark patches, streaks, and other changes in albedo (brightness) that are hidden when the sunlight strikes them at a lower angle. Here is an image I took last night under shadowless lighting conditions.

.

.

Fruiting Plants

.

How about three fruiting Elton plants?
No commentary.
No identification.
Just enjoy.

.

.

Before Digitals

.

During yesterday’s walk we came across a couple of Great Spangled Fritillaries so I took a couple of pictures. In the days before digital cameras I would have had to draw them if I wanted a record of the encounter. Film was too expensive and the process too difficult to do anything else. Well, I just happen to have a sketch I made of one of these beautiful butterflies in the 1970’s. It isn’t all that great but those buggers don’t sit still for very long.

.

.

Two Mushrooms

.

I only have about a week before I hit the deadline for an article I promised to write, so I don’t want to take the brain-time to try and identify these mushrooms. The red one was found in Summerhill and is about the size of a quarter. The others were in the yard of a neighbor we pass on our daily walks.

.

GOSH: Fungi are more closely related to animals than to plants.
.

Damselfly

.

It may not be perfectly sharp but, all things considered, I’m rather pleased with this image. It is an insect that I don’t often get to photograph, a Black-winged Damselfly (Calopteryx muscaria) and it was quite a distance away. We were standing on the bridge (at the horse farm) and it was near water level below us. That would have to be close to 20 ft. This is a male of the species, the female does not have a metallic shine to its body.

.

.