You can’t literally see lights from space or whatever. If somewhere had less coverage on google maps you wouldn’t think it’s uninhabited, but for some reason, people irl seem to be constantly referring to this image as though it’s a literal picture. Mostly for ‘civilized’ reasons, but also light pollution and just other stuff. Maybe this just made the rounds on reddit or something?
Those are taken with an 8-20 second shutter speed which takes in considerably more light. In some cases they actually take several dozen photos in the same spot then stitch them together as one picture, this brings out light considerably more than it is visible usually.
Here’s live video, you will see little to no light: https://youtu.be/DfEr5XCFNWM
that’s more bc of the poor quality the ISS main cam is versus the new EHDC camera, you can see lights at night on the higher res livestream camera
Yes but this is still a tiny amount of light compared to the composite images and slow shutter speed images intended to capture light. It’s the same technique as photographing epic pictures of stars and galaxies in the night sky.
okay but i was replying to OP saying you literally can’t see them from space and you can?
you could use the same argument about the aurora borealis, just because it’s darker in person doesn’t mean you can’t see it
exactly. it takes quite a few seconds of exposure for most cameras to match a human eye’s low-light perception.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
