Taggart 
This is the one.
Although I would have preferred it not be called "Earthset," good grief.
Oh my. On the other hand, here's an eclipsed sun
https://images-assets.nasa.gov/image/art002e009301/art002e009301~orig.jpg
Bodo TascheHere's another gem. I was unprepared for modern cameras to capture this and what it would do to me.
Dave@mttaggart These are so beautiful.
XennyG@dm @mttaggart “Crescent Earth” is profound.
Mike Torr@mttaggart I know exactly what you mean. Looks like a science fiction SFX shot. Makes me want to weep!
rhempel@mttaggart THIS. As awesome as the original earth from space photos were, captured with (I think) Hasselblad large format cameras on film - modern digital cameras have far more resolution than all but the best film had back then.
It also reminds us that as close as the moon is, the environment is harsher than even the harshest earthside environment (except maybe the under water).
Humans are not meant to be in oxygen free environments - we belong on Earth!
esc key@rhempel @mttaggart The old hasselblads would have waaaaaay more resolution. Even 35mm have pretty good “resolution” (obviously not an apples to apples comparison here). Any problem you might have with the old Apollo photos has nothing to do with that setup being a film camera
@what @mttaggart Hmmm, I have always believed ISO 100 film in 35mm format was about equivalent to a 10 MP sensor.
The Hasselblad C500 had a 56x56 mm image size, for about 4x the 35mm size so the equivalent would be about a 40 MP image.
For sure those old Hasselblads were awesome and the optics were incredibly good - and those first images of our blue marble made the world stop and think hard about our little rock with water and oxygen.
Either way, those new images are fantastic!
@rhempel @mttaggart …which are more MP than these images…