×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Time Lapse Video of the VLT In Chile

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the industrial-light-and-magic dept.

Space 105

schwit1 writes with a video "captured by Stephane Guisard and Jose Francisco Salgado at the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile's Atacama Desert. And it might make you cry. What makes this time lapse particularly amazing — because we've all seen plenty of time lapse videos of the night sky — is the four telescopes in the foreground. Watching these instruments work against a black background would be endlessly fascinating on its own. Unfortunately you won't be able to pay them too much attention. Because damn, what a sky."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

105 comments

Why not link to the original video? (5, Informative)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279510)

Instead of sending everyone to another blog to view the postage stamp sized video in an embedded player, here's the link to the original video at YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFpeM3fxJoQ [youtube.com]

Nice use of HDR in the video. How did they do that?

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279522)

I'm referring to what looks like an HDR shot at 0:45, btw.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279606)

That looks like the landscape was lit by a setting moon.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279702)

When you're doing a slow time lapse photos taken a few minutes apart really won't have much effect on the end result. Shoot bracketed photos. Stitch them together with a program that supports batch, use ffmpeg to make a time lapse.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

CaptainLard (1902452) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279598)

Astounding no matter how the links take you to the video. Has anyone physically been there? Aside from the time lapse, how much of this is editing and how much would you see if you just camped out there for a few nights? If its anything close it would be worth a trip.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

mrxak (727974) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279782)

I found the video to be fairly tedious and the music annoying. If you want to see the entire night sky in much better quality and without any telescopes cluttering it up, check out the skysurvey project. You'll have to provide your own soundtrack.

http://media.skysurvey.org/interactive360/index.html [skysurvey.org]

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

nschubach (922175) | more than 2 years ago | (#36283754)

What I like about the time lapse (and hopefully I wasn't just seeing things) was the "parallax" you got with different stars in the milky way where some stars would move faster across the sky than others in the video. It felt more alive than static photos stitched together.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

infolation (840436) | more than 2 years ago | (#36283878)

There are beautiful 720p films of other observatories from the same photographer on vimeo [vimeo.com]

And Sidereal Motion from the Bailey-Salgado project [baileysalgadoproject.com] is also very interesting.

Sidereal Motion (2010) is a four-movement film+music work about the night sky as photographed from five astronomical observatories around the world. It features awe-inspiring time-lapse sequences and still images shot by Salgado and original music by Bailey. The close correlation between music and visuals results in a work where the combination of these is much greater than the sum of its parts.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279828)

I have the impression they used very very long shutter times.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280628)

No, if they used long shutter times you would see streaks instead of points for the stars because the camera obviously wasn't moving. The occasional streaks you do see are mostly satellites.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281142)

I wasn't GP, but he probably means long as in much more than what you'd normally use to shoot a normal picture in daylight. Perhaps it was only a second or two. Long enough to make things brighter than your eyes can see, but not enough to see streaks.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

mr_walrus (410770) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281258)

awww, i was hoping the streaks were lasers being fired at some alien menace

Re:Why not link to the original video? (2)

Goaway (82658) | more than 2 years ago | (#36282794)

With a wide-angle view like that, stars wouldn't visibly streak until you got up to several tens of seconds of shutter time. That is enough time to turn night into day, really.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (2)

Splab (574204) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280122)

Has anyone physically been there?

No, those 4 buildings where put there by aliens who also happened to put up a camera and come down to us with it...

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

m85476585 (884822) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280446)

I haven't been there, but I've been to Kitt Peak Observatory in Arizona, and the one on Mauna Kea (but we couldn't stay on top of Mauna Kea much past sunset, sadly). Mauna Kea was surreal even during the day because it feels like you are on top of the world.

The most amazing view of the night sky I've seen was at Kitt Peak. It really does look a lot like this video, but not as bright and without all the color. To be able to see the sky like this requires an absolutely dark location, and you will be seeing at the lower limit of your vision. The rods in your eyes are more sensitive than cones, but they cannot see color well or at all.

The times in the video when it looks like the sun came up are actually the moon. With a camera, it doesn't take HDR to be able to see stars at the same time as the moon- just set it so the moon is overexposed and the stars are correctly exposed. With your eyes, though, you won't be able to see that many stars once the moon is out because it will temporarily ruin your sensitive night vision. When the sun actually comes up in the video, everything goes white since it looks like they are using a fixed exposure setting.

Last time I tried night sky photography with a camera, I couldn't use long exposures because even in the relatively short exposure time the stars would move enough to leave short trails. They might have done this video by registering several shots from a short time frame on top of each other. Or they might have a better camera than I do. It would take a fast lens and a sensor with low noise at high ISO settings.

In short, it would be worth a trip to camp there, or somewhere similar. You won't see a bright, colorful sky, but you will probably see at least as many stars as there are in this video. Seeing the milky way at night never ceases to amaze me, and it is sad how little of the night sky we can see in most places because of light pollution.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

e4g4 (533831) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281106)

The most amazing view I've seen of the night sky was from the Daintree Rainforest in Australia. The view of the milky way (and the night sky, in general) is far better in the Southern hemisphere than it is in the Northern. I'm jealous of everyone who gets to see it every night. Mind you, as I currently live in NYC, there are still loads in the Northern hemisphere who've got it better than me.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#36282574)

A depressingly large number of Aussie's have never seen our night sky in all it's glory because they simply have not bothered to walk away from the holiday cabin lights and take a look.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36282970)

Yep, spot on there cobber, I'm too busy surfing, sucking piss, shooting kangaroos , stealing bread and putting another prawn on the barbie to worry about that shit! ;)

Re:Why not link to the original video? (1)

Pieroxy (222434) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279612)

Thanks for the link. Very soothing and beautiful video clip. Majes me want to look at star trek again ;-)

Re:Why not link to the original video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279622)

Had to google HDR. I wondered how they got the stars to show up in daylight.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279760)

hmmm, maybe it was moonlight.

Re:Why not link to the original video? (4, Informative)

SKPhoton (683703) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280846)

It actually isn't traditional HDR (where multiple exposures are combined into one frame to create a final image with higher dynamic range.) What you're talking about is somehow gradually increasing the exposure to progressively let more light in as it gets darker as the sun sets. There's currently no magical way to achieve this, but there are a number of different techniques that people have implemented thus far including using light meters to watch the ambient light and either lengthen the shutter speed or gradually stop down the lens aperture, using multiple cameras to bracket different exposures and bounce between the cameras in post-processing, and so on.

You can read about these techniques in more detail at the very bottom of this tutorial [timescapes.org] under the header labeled Timelapse "Holy Grail"? Sunset, Sunrise, Day to Night Transitions.

Accurate Summary (1)

DarkAnt (760333) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279538)

This is one of the most accurate summaries I've seen on Slashdot for quite some time :)

Re:Accurate Summary (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279580)

Yeah. Word for word repost of a professionally written article.

BTW, nice article. Great images. Makes you realize how insignificant we are.

Im a man with no emotions (4, Insightful)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279540)

But seeing this made me weep.
The universe is beautiful.

Re:Im a man with no emotions (2)

JD770 (1227350) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279618)

I haven't seen skies like this since my teenaged years, camping in the Big Bend NP under a cloudless, new moon.

The sensation you get when seeing more stars than sky is something that must be experienced fist hand. Pictures rarely seem to do it justice.

I can't wait to see their faces when my children get to experience it!

Re:Im a man with no emotions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280242)

You must be an inigma?

Re:Im a man with no emotions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280612)

It made me queasy inside, seeing the beautiful sky above and scary mechanical things taking place below.

Re:Im a man with no emotions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280688)

Mod parent funny! This made me laugh out loud.

Re:Im a man with no emotions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36281834)

Don't worry. Chuck Norris, Vin Diesel, Technoviking, the Terminator, Rambo and Mr. T unanimously decided to allow a rare exception on this.
Provided you weep in the coolest and manliest way possible.

Mute the sound (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279564)

And play some early Pink Floyd or Moody Blues.. It works much better... Sure wish they dissolved instead of cutting the edits

Re:Mute the sound (2)

RoFLKOPTr (1294290) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280126)

Cross-dissolves are annoying and used only by people new to Windows Movie Maker.

Re:Mute the sound (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280186)

Cross-dissolves are annoying...

Well, I suppose that's true for those who only watch cop shows on the TV, but anybody with any sense for aesthetics will heartily disagree.

FYI: a dissolve of less than a second would work quite nicely.

Re:Mute the sound (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280228)

People who use cross-dissolves are also the ones that title in Comic Sans. And I don't have to explain how wrong that is, do I?

Re:Mute the sound (1)

RoFLKOPTr (1294290) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280270)

Well, I suppose that's true for those who only watch cop shows on the TV, but anybody with any sense for aesthetics will heartily disagree.

As a professional in the video production and broadcast industry, I will heartily disagree that people heartily disagree with my original point.

Cross-dissolves work in very specific circumstances. This video looked great with hard cuts. Cross-dissolves would look stupid.

Re:Mute the sound (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280400)

*sigh* MTV has destroyed a whole generation it seems.. I hope you're not one of those who believe that holding a steady shot for more than five seconds is boring.. Irreconcilable differences of opinion is where this will stand.. You're stepping on my pasto...

Re:Mute the sound (1)

RoFLKOPTr (1294290) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280532)

*sigh* MTV has destroyed a whole generation it seems.. I hope you're not one of those who believe that holding a steady shot for more than five seconds is boring.. Irreconcilable differences of opinion is where this will stand.. You're stepping on my pasto...

Absolutely not. If that was the case, I would have found the video we're discussing to be boring. MTV is absolute shit with regards to both their content and production value. Dissolves ARE boring, though, and way overused. This video does not need them. Why use them when they're not needed?

Re:Mute the sound (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280674)

Again, you seem to be under the impression that all dissolves are 5 seconds or longer. Try half a second, and you might be able to comprehend what I'm saying. Seems like subtlety isn't being taught anymore. and maybe the cacophony they used for the soundtrack is throwing you off. The shots are beautiful, but it's obvious the composition was put together by punks trying to be hip. The styles clash worse than 'Red China on a blue tablecloth'.. Eh, whatever, I'm just too much of a romantic..

Re:Mute the sound (1)

niklask (1073774) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281218)

The shots are beautiful, but it's obvious the composition was put together by punks trying to be hip.

And you know this how? I know JF Salgado personally and he is by no standards a punk. He is in fact a very professional astronomer and visualizer. It may not be your style but that in no way means he is a punk.

Re:Mute the sound (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280690)

Absolutely not. If that was the case, I would have found the video we're discussing to be boring. MTV is absolute shit with regards to both their content and production value. Dissolves ARE boring, though, and way overused. This video does not need them. Why use them when they're not needed?

I would have cropped it a little different, more to the left.

Re:Mute the sound (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280492)

You're old. I'm not well versed enough in post-rock to identify the artist, but it fit the video well.

Re:Mute the sound (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280734)

You're old.

:-) Shhh! You're blowing my cover...

And you call that racket 'art'? Damn! I guess I am old..

Actually the music is perfectly fine.. if it were used over the videos of the OBL raid.

You know what I hate? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279596)

When some pretentious douchebag deigns to tell me what I will or will not like. You know what else I hate? When the shitty thing they point out is a poorly made video with really shitty music over tedious, repetitive video.

Re:You know what I hate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279764)

When some pretentious douchebag deigns to tell me what I will or will not like.

That is what pretentious douchebags do, after all.

Another neat video (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279638)

Check this video out too...different perspective to what we're used to seeing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1O66XsbrOA&feature=watch_response

Damn planes flying in the way (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279758)

At least they have lasers to shoot at them.

Hmm... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36279818)

A TLV of the VLT?

stars visible before the sun is gone (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | more than 2 years ago | (#36279956)

What surprises me about the first scene of the video, is the amount of stars that are visible while the mountains are still bathing in light. In fact, the number of visible stars at the top of the video doesn't change much during the progress from dusk to night.
For a moment, I suspected the uploader of superimposing a night sky image on a local sunset. There must be a better explanation, but I can't find it.

Re:stars visible before the sun is gone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280010)

hdr effects. see :
http://www.quasarchile.cl/observing_the_atacama_its_lands_and_skies.htm
the pics in there use a normal cam. stars arent visible.

Re:stars visible before the sun is gone (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280066)

Of course it's manipulated like crazy. You'll never see anything like this with the naked eye.

Re:stars visible before the sun is gone (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280106)

You don't see it like this with your naked eye, but you see it on photos or videos with very long exposure time, no need to superpose anything. ;-)

Re:stars visible before the sun is gone (2)

phozz bare (720522) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280342)

The better explanation is this: That's no sun. It's the moon! If you take a long exposure shot on a moonlit night, the sky will be blue and the land will appear sunlit, but there will be stars visible in the sky - just like in this video. Occasionally the moon itself is visible as a very bright spot. Note that when the sun rises the shot becomes completely overexposed, and that's why several scenes end with everything washing out and becoming white.

Re:stars visible before the sun is gone (1)

grnbrg (140964) | more than 2 years ago | (#36283872)

The better explanation is this: That's no sun. It's the moon!

That's no moon! It's a space station!

One from La Palma - Mercator Telescope (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280008)

Another night sky lapse, this time from La Palma, Canary Islands

http://www.youtube.com/user/papics?blend=7&ob=5#p/u/23/eblrsThmK_4

Indeed it did make me cry... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280132)

... because soon there won't be enough WHITE people living here to carry on with this work...

You know, what with blacks having an average IQ of 70-80, and generally not giving two hoots about things like astronomy...

Still, keep repeating the magic word "Racist!", as if that's going to stop your children from being killed, or starving to death, once the third worlders become the majority...

You might also want to watch this... (3, Interesting)

Tasha26 (1613349) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280244)

A month ago TSOPhotography posted this time-lapse video of the milky way [vimeo.com] (please watch it in HD). No VLT here and the results are amazing, not to mention the soundtrack... even National Geography forwarded their link. Enjoy :)

Re:You might also want to watch this... (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281596)

No VLT, but a short glimpse on Teide observatory, though... ;D With or without, beautiful movie, thanks for the link.

Stray light (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280320)

I live in the city, and I only see a few stars at night thanks to the stray light from street lanterns. I have never seen a night's sky like the one in the video in my life.

Re:Stray light (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36281054)

If you travel to really dark location, hundreds of miles from any city, on a moonless night, stay in a turnoff car, really dark for about an hour. Then walk about at midnight and look up...

For best effect, do it in winter in middle of a desert around the time when Leonids meteor shower is active..

It's one thing to look at a video. It's another to see it with your own eyes.

Orange Laser?? (1)

InsertWittyNameHere (1438813) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280392)

Beautiful video! Does anyone know what the orange laser is used for? Pointing things out to others? Bouncing off the moon? Shooting those pesky UFOs?

Re:Orange Laser?? (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280728)

Beautiful video! Does anyone know what the orange laser is used for? Pointing things out to others? Bouncing off the moon? Shooting those pesky UFOs?

It's an aiming laser. It's sort of described in the ESO website. Seems to help the other telescopes track. Remember that these telescopes are hooked together to form a "Very Large Telescope".

My original thought was that the astronomers were bored and were shooting aliens, but I guess that's not the case.

Re:Orange Laser?? (1)

arun84h (1454607) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280818)

That's the adaptive optics system which basically creates an artificial star [wikipedia.org] for the telescope to focus on. This helps correct light distortion, as well as warding off any stray UFOs.

Re:Orange Laser?? (4, Informative)

Dusty101 (765661) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281394)

Yup. As others have pointed out, it's a laser guide star. In a nutshell, the basic idea is that the thing (e.g. a star) that the telescope's looking at gets all smeared out & wibbly wobbly by foreground atmospheric variations (twinkling). The idea here is that if you generate a bright spot in the sky with known properties close to the thing you want to observe, then by comparing what your spot looks like with what you know it should look like, you can calculate which tiny variable distortions you want to add in to the perfect curve of your mirrors to counteract these atmospheric wobbles. The thinking is that if you can correct the wobbles in your fake "star" & it's close to the real one on the sky, then the correction can be assumed to be about the same.

The actual corrective distortions to the mirror are handled by things that are basically very precise, very small computer-controlled pistons that can apply corrections many per second.

(For the record, IAAA - I Am An Astrophysicist ,although I've worked at other observatories - not specifically at the VLT).

Re:Orange Laser?? (1)

Mindcontrolled (1388007) | more than 2 years ago | (#36281600)

As Astrophysicist, could you point out what all those shutters on the telescope buildings that constantly open and close are all about?

Re:Orange Laser?? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36281672)

The shutters regulate temperature; temperature changes make light passing though air "wobble".

Re:Orange Laser?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36283646)

They are wind screens. Whenever the telescope inside does not point low enough, they are closed, and conversely, they are opened when the telescope needs to point down.

Re:Orange Laser?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36282042)

wibbly wobbly

Does it also get timey wimey? ;)

We're amazing little creatures...aren't we? (2)

Slutticus (1237534) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280424)

Busily exploring our world. Wow. It almost brought a tear to my eye....is that weird? Something about watching those telescopes buzzing away with activity against that background....

More info on this VLT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280426)

National Geographic did a cool episode about this telescope - http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/worlds-toughest-fixes/all/recoat-a-telescope-mirror

Yellow beams of light? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280444)

Anyone have a clue what those yellow beams of light are for? I don't mean the airplane/satellite streaks, but the beams that appear to originate from one of the telescopes; the first one is at 2:42 in the video.

Re:Yellow beams of light? (1)

riverat1 (1048260) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280664)

I think that is a device for measuring atmospheric distortion. The can use the information to correct for it in the actual images the telescope is taking.

Go Science! Go Arts! (1)

mustPushCart (1871520) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280486)

Science makes beautiful things, Artists create beautiful things. The rest are management and they just make a lot of money somehow... no justice in the world.

Re:Go Science! Go Arts! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36281448)

Science doesn't generally make anything, it just reveals. Nonetheless, artistry is possible in all endeavors.

Funniest thing I heard at work this week was an artist saying her brother would make a great programmer, he's not at all creative.

Time Lapse Shows Earth Rotating Instead of Stars (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280538)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1O66XsbrOA

thank you I am now momentarily DEAF (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280550)

It's getting to be a meme on youtube, where they start with quiet, soft, soothing music, UNTIL ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY BUMP IT 60DB about 35 seconds in, sending me scrambling for my volume control. Don't turn your volume up like I did. God I hate that.

But the video still looks nice while listening to the sounds of my ears ring.

Re:thank you I am now momentarily DEAF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36283412)

it's called post-rock.

Re:thank you I am now momentarily DEAF (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36285174)

It's called an intro.

A better question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280578)

Is what's the green laser that keeps shooting from the "telescopes"? I'm sensing aliens signaling the mothership. Telescopes, yea, nice cover.

BUFFERING (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36280856)

*shitty rock music*
BUFFERING
BUFFERING
*shitty rock music*
BUFFERING
BUFFERING
BUFFERING
BUFFERING

I've seen better.

Reminds me of Hanle (2)

tanveer1979 (530624) | more than 2 years ago | (#36280980)

High altitude observatories are usually located at places with little light pollution, and clean air.
I have made two trips to Hanle(4400m above MSL)
For the first visit, we could not see stars as it was overcast(a rare event!)
However, on the second visit, we did see an amazing sky.
http://tanveer.smugmug.com/Travel/Ladakh-2010/Chushul-Hanle/IMG3746/906412622_rooft-XL.jpg [smugmug.com]

I am told there are some high altitude observatories in Andes mountains(4500m approx)
2600m above sea level is one of the lowest.

Re:Reminds me of Hanle (1)

Fubari (196373) | more than 2 years ago | (#36282106)

Beautiful shot - I'm happy for you; I have to put that on my travel wish list now :-)

Re:Reminds me of Hanle (1)

Shag (3737) | more than 2 years ago | (#36283328)

Nice sky there! I've been aware of Hanle/Mt. Saraswati for a while, because it's one of the three observatory sites in the world (the 5000m part of the Atacama Desert in Chile and ~4300m Mt. Evans outside Denver are the other two) that are higher than Mauna Kea (where I work [naoj.org] and sometimes take pretty pictures [birchalls.net]), but this is the first picture I've seen of the night sky there. If I ever get back to India, I want to go there, instead of hanging out in Delhi again. :)

Re:Reminds me of Hanle (1)

tanveer1979 (530624) | more than 2 years ago | (#36285058)

You could get in touch with the guys who run the telescope.
http://www.iiap.res.in/iao/about.html [iiap.res.in]
Permits for foreigners are a little difficult to get otherwise.

That said, you can visit other places in ladakh region (Tso moriri/Pangong) which are 4000m+ and have equally amazing skies.

Check out my http://tanveer.smugmug.com/Travel/Ladakh-2010 [smugmug.com] gallery, as well as 2009 gallery in the "Travel" section.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...