Jon Morse (University of Colorado) and NASA Hubble Space Telescope image, published by STScI.
Support as nominatorSumanch (
talk) 19:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Far too much HDR, what do you mean it can't be reshot ;-p No seriously, its excellent, obviously.
Mfield (
talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Pretty soft, can we get someone with decent equipment to reshoot?? ;-) -
Fcb981(
talk:
contribs) 20:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Actually that image is not a picture of
Eta Carinae. It is an image of the
Carina Nebula, NGC 3372, where Eta Carinae resides. A lot of people make the mistake of calling it "Eta Carinae Nebula".
This image should clear this popular error.
Sumanch (
talk) 19:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I think we're actually agreeing with each other. I was unclear in my earlier comment-- I meant to say that we already have a featured picutre where this star can be seen. (It's a spectacular object, and certainly worthy of being featured more than once).
Spikebrennan (
talk) 12:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I agree with you. But the difference between these images is same as the difference between
this image and
this.
Sumanch (
talk) 17:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Excellent quality and exceptional content
J.T Pearson (
talk) 15:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. Clearly distorted. Needs restitching to correct this. Also too warm, needs colour correction. ;-)
Diliff |
(Talk)(Contribs) 16:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. Blown highlights on the stars! NauticaShades 22:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Simply perfect. --
Dcelasun (
talk) 11:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. Wow. However, can we remove 'stunning' from the caption?
J Milburn (
talk) 19:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)reply
It is no longer stunning.:)
Sumanch (
talk) 22:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support if i can't call it stunning then i shall have to call it magnificent. as for the other featured picture mentioned previously, it looks a bit, dare i say, messy in comparison to this picture. this is certainly the better of the two pictures by a long way.
Pm504 (
talk) —Preceding
comment was added at 01:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment is this an artists conception? the
nasa website shows a different image
Thisglad (
talk) 00:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)reply
This image is not an artist's conception. The
NASA image was cropped from this
original to emphasize Eta Carinae and its ejecta, the
Homunculus Nebula, in visible spectrum. The red aura is a near IR image of the surrounding mater interacting with the radiation from Eta Carinae.
Sumanch (
talk) 17:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Not only is this photo informative, it is just plain cool. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Gerrittk (
talk •
contribs) 20:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Great picture! SpencerT♦C 19:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Promoted Image:EtaCarinae.jpgMER-C 09:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Jon Morse (University of Colorado) and NASA Hubble Space Telescope image, published by STScI.
Support as nominatorSumanch (
talk) 19:25, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Far too much HDR, what do you mean it can't be reshot ;-p No seriously, its excellent, obviously.
Mfield (
talk) 19:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Pretty soft, can we get someone with decent equipment to reshoot?? ;-) -
Fcb981(
talk:
contribs) 20:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Actually that image is not a picture of
Eta Carinae. It is an image of the
Carina Nebula, NGC 3372, where Eta Carinae resides. A lot of people make the mistake of calling it "Eta Carinae Nebula".
This image should clear this popular error.
Sumanch (
talk) 19:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I think we're actually agreeing with each other. I was unclear in my earlier comment-- I meant to say that we already have a featured picutre where this star can be seen. (It's a spectacular object, and certainly worthy of being featured more than once).
Spikebrennan (
talk) 12:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I agree with you. But the difference between these images is same as the difference between
this image and
this.
Sumanch (
talk) 17:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Excellent quality and exceptional content
J.T Pearson (
talk) 15:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. Clearly distorted. Needs restitching to correct this. Also too warm, needs colour correction. ;-)
Diliff |
(Talk)(Contribs) 16:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. Blown highlights on the stars! NauticaShades 22:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Simply perfect. --
Dcelasun (
talk) 11:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. Wow. However, can we remove 'stunning' from the caption?
J Milburn (
talk) 19:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)reply
It is no longer stunning.:)
Sumanch (
talk) 22:46, 29 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Support if i can't call it stunning then i shall have to call it magnificent. as for the other featured picture mentioned previously, it looks a bit, dare i say, messy in comparison to this picture. this is certainly the better of the two pictures by a long way.
Pm504 (
talk) —Preceding
comment was added at 01:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment is this an artists conception? the
nasa website shows a different image
Thisglad (
talk) 00:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)reply
This image is not an artist's conception. The
NASA image was cropped from this
original to emphasize Eta Carinae and its ejecta, the
Homunculus Nebula, in visible spectrum. The red aura is a near IR image of the surrounding mater interacting with the radiation from Eta Carinae.
Sumanch (
talk) 17:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Not only is this photo informative, it is just plain cool. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Gerrittk (
talk •
contribs) 20:35, 2 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Support Great picture! SpencerT♦C 19:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)reply
Promoted Image:EtaCarinae.jpgMER-C 09:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)reply