Storm brewing in the Atlantic

[jkshyt]

_A749404-Enhanced-NR by jk Sullivan, on Flickr

CC Welcome

[Geoff F]

Very good. This is another of those situations where clicking on the image shows an alternative image with even greater fine detail.

[Chataignier]

Wow ! Seriously threatening skies. I like the overall impression very much, but would like to see the horizon level and the red spot (top 1/3 centre) removed. The light specs I presume are birds, but the red one seems odd.

[DanK]

Great capture. I agree with David. I assume the red is a light on a plane, but it's distracting. In the slight edit here, I did what David suggested, cropped a bit, and added a bit of global contrast by dropping the white point and applying a curve. Not a full edit, but to suggest possible directions.

[stuck]

...The light specs I presume are birds, but the red one seems odd.

Those light specs look more like star trails. The EXIF shows the FL is 24 mm and the camera is a Sony with a crop factor of 1.5 so to avoid start trails the astrophoto '500 rule' suggests a max SS of 500 / 24 x 1.5 =~14 secs but the EXIF shows the actual SS was 30 secs.

If the red one was a light plane then in a 30 sec exposure would that not also show up as a trail, not a blob? Perhaps it's a UAP?

[DanK]

Those light specs look more like star trails. The EXIF shows the FL is 24 mm and the camera is a Sony with a crop factor of 1.5 so to avoid start trails the astrophoto '500 rule' suggests a max SS of 500 / 24 x 1.5 =~14 secs but the EXIF shows the actual SS was 30 secs.

If the red one was a light plane then in a 30 sec exposure would that not also show up as a trail, not a blob? Perhaps it's a UAP?

Interesting. I went back to it, and sure enough the white spots are lines, and they are parallel to each other, which is consistent with star trails. However, they are very slightly curved--comma-shaped. Does this imply that the camera was moved very slightly clockwise during exposure?

[Chataignier]

Yes, I had not noticed that it was a long exposure, 30s at ISO800, cant be birds, so almost certainly star trails.

[stuck]

...Does this imply that the camera was moved very slightly clockwise during exposure?

Yes, because the planet it's stood on is rotating. A really long exposure will give circular star trails, e.g.:
https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/a...-trails-how-to

[jkshyt]

Wow ! Seriously threatening skies. I like the overall impression very much, but would like to see the horizon level and the red spot (top 1/3 centre) removed. The light specs I presume are birds, but the red one seems odd.

Good point! I'll have to correct that, thanks.

[jkshyt]

Interesting. I went back to it, and sure enough the white spots are lines, and they are parallel to each other, which is consistent with star trails. However, they are very slightly curved--comma-shaped. Does this imply that the camera was moved very slightly clockwise during exposure?

It was windy, and I did try and hold that tripod secure. I can't be certain I didn't keep it steady.

[jkshyt]

Because the lightning was so random and it wasn't a planned outing; just the camera and Manfrotto mini, I choose the longest shutter and lowest acceptable ISO to catch whatever strikes I could.
Thank you all for the great advise!
I'm really not sure what the red light is. Were it a plane, it should be dotted across the horizon.

[stuck]

...I'm really not sure what the red light is...

I've asked the advice of someone who knows about astrophotography. I'll post again if he has any ideas.

[DanK]

Yes, because the planet it's stood on is rotating. A really long exposure will give circular star trails, e.g.:
https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/a...-trails-how-to

Yes, but not curved that much or in that irregular shape. The image below is a 425 second exposure taken around midnight. you can see that the star trails are only slightly curved, and the curves are of course completely regular, given that the speed of rotation is. So I think something else was going on in this photo. I think there was camera motion and that it doesn't show up in the core part of the image because the illumination from the lightning was so brief.

[jkshyt]

Attached is the original converted to JPG.
Maybe this could give more info

_A749404 by jk Sullivan, on Flickr

[stuck]

...I think there was camera motion and that it doesn't show up in the core part of the image because the illumination from the lightning was so brief.

Which would be in keeping with the OP's previous comment:

It was windy, and I did try and hold that tripod secure. I can't be certain I didn't keep it steady.

[stuck]

I've asked the advice of someone who knows about astrophotography. I'll post again if he has any ideas.

My astrophoto contact says he's never seen anything like the red / blue blob before.

A fanciful suggestion as to what it might be is that it is a fluke capture of a 'transient luminous event' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper-...eric_lightning), specifically the type known as 'pixies', see this figure: https://m.astronomy.com/sitefiles/resources/image.aspx?item={BCC662F5-7658-4413-8A62-E8828B7236B8}, from this page: https://m.astronomy.com/news/2017/02...s-lighting-iss If indeed it is a 'pixie' then it probably shouldn't be cloned out

[Karm Redland]

My astrophoto contact says he's never seen anything like the red / blue blob before.

A fanciful suggestion as to what it might be is that it is a fluke capture of a 'transient luminous event' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper-...eric_lightning), specifically the type known as 'pixies', see this figure: https://m.astronomy.com/sitefiles/resources/image.aspx?item={BCC662F5-7658-4413-8A62-E8828B7236B8}, from this page: https://m.astronomy.com/news/2017/02...s-lighting-iss If indeed it is a 'pixie' then it probably shouldn't be cloned out

[Karm Redland]

I'll play the part of the fool, but wouldn't Mars appear as a red dot on a long exposure?

Karm

[jkshyt]

A few exposures before dialing in the camera.
Red dot is still there, I thought maybe it was the equipment.

_A749402 by jk Sullivan, on Flickr

[stuck]

A few exposures before dialing in the camera.
Red dot is still there, I thought maybe it was the equipment.

OK so it's not a 'pixie'. It might be the camera but, would not a problem at that spot on the sensor show up on all your photos, i.e. even on ones taken on a different day at a different location? Assuming you don't see such a flaw in other photos then...

The EXIF show the date and time the photo was taken and guessing that the view is looking west out across the ocean from somewhere on the eastern seaboard of the US and using Stellarium (planetarium software) to visualise the night sky at that time, date and location, it could be the star called Vega. It can't be Mars as at that time & date Mars was below the horizon.