Why did I get 2 Suns?
Nov 23, 2017 09:04:15 #
Nov 23, 2017 09:05:04 #
I’m guessing that the clouds were such to block the middle of the sun and leave only two opposite edges clear. Refraction in the lens? Please how that would only affect the sun. If you don’t see a “double sun” in similar images then it was certainly not the lens or camera.
Nov 23, 2017 09:24:40 #
bioteacher wrote:
I took pictures during sunset at Long Beach NY with a Canon 80D and Canon 24-105 L Lens. for some unknown reason, in a run of pictures there seems to be a double sun. Was wondering if this was due to refraction in the lens?
It is a well known phenomenon due to reflection off clouds on the horizon, due to the angle the light is coming through, there is great density of the clouds. Sometimes there will be three suns.
Nov 23, 2017 10:14:15 #
rmalarz wrote:
It's possible that there was part of a cloud obscuring the central part of the sun. What you photographed was the two parts not being obscured.
--Bob
--Bob
Tinker with the original (hope it's RAW) and see if you can find some evidence that the cloud was splitting the sun. It would be hard to see without a good photograph and a decent post-processing program.
Nov 23, 2017 10:19:48 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Tatooine perhaps?
Couldn't be, that was a long, long time ago. Also far, far away.
Nov 23, 2017 10:32:56 #
rmalarz wrote:
It's possible that there was part of a cloud obscuring the central part of the sun. What you photographed was the two parts not being obscured.
--Bob
--Bob
Put my vote with Bob!
Nov 23, 2017 10:37:53 #
Nov 23, 2017 10:41:42 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
bioteacher wrote:
I was using a B+W UV filter.
Well, it's never a good idea to use ANY filter when shooting sunrises and sunsets directly... even the very best filters will increase flare if you use them in those situations.
BUT, while there's plenty of flare, that's not what caused the "2 suns" in this image. I'd guess that it's as some others described, the "dual sun" was caused by a cloud.
Nov 23, 2017 10:50:20 #
AVG wrote:
Is this what wdross is talking about?
This is what non-astro photographers call "flares" and also "Blooms". It's just the moon is the model at this point.
If you could have a strong enough beauty dish, the moon itself could lite also.
Nov 23, 2017 10:51:47 #
Darn nice shot.
There is clearly a cloud between the sun and the camera. It could have split the sun into two bright dots or it could have split by prismatic effect. resulting in two distinct images the size of the original disk on the image..
What focal length lens? A 500 mm would give a full sun disk about 10 mm in diameter, for instance. If the two solar images are each smaller than expected, or4 taken with a very short focal length lens, the lens caught the diffuse "dots" coming through that cloud. This looks more like a short focal length lens, maybe 50 mm, with a solar disk size only 1 mm on the sensor (I downloaded this reduced-size image, but there was no metadata to be read).
If the split was prismatic, there would be a color shift between the two images.
BTW, a planet orbiting around a double-sun might or might not have perpetual daylight. Depends on the closeness of the suns compared to the orbital distance of the planet.
There is clearly a cloud between the sun and the camera. It could have split the sun into two bright dots or it could have split by prismatic effect. resulting in two distinct images the size of the original disk on the image..
What focal length lens? A 500 mm would give a full sun disk about 10 mm in diameter, for instance. If the two solar images are each smaller than expected, or4 taken with a very short focal length lens, the lens caught the diffuse "dots" coming through that cloud. This looks more like a short focal length lens, maybe 50 mm, with a solar disk size only 1 mm on the sensor (I downloaded this reduced-size image, but there was no metadata to be read).
If the split was prismatic, there would be a color shift between the two images.
BTW, a planet orbiting around a double-sun might or might not have perpetual daylight. Depends on the closeness of the suns compared to the orbital distance of the planet.
Nov 23, 2017 10:54:11 #
GENorkus wrote:
Put my vote with Bob!
Yes, that was clearly the answer, its just that the OP refuses to accept the factual explanation and still seeks a mythical answer. There is no mystery here.
Nov 23, 2017 10:58:07 #
Nov 23, 2017 11:01:24 #
Manny Jay
Loc: Colorado
Reflection from front of lens to tilter, then back to sensor. If you had shot this head-on, there would have been only one sun. The sun was off to one side.
Nov 23, 2017 11:03:57 #
Nov 23, 2017 11:07:03 #
And still a darn nice shot. May the force be with you all on this Thanksgiving. The sun disk is just 1/2 mm at this focal length -- just little point, so filter reflection, or cloud effect.
I shoot with many old Pentax lenses... because I can... and they sometimes produce ghosting because the internal surfaces are not well anti-reflection coated.
I shoot with many old Pentax lenses... because I can... and they sometimes produce ghosting because the internal surfaces are not well anti-reflection coated.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.