[model 29]

You do realize that a "fisheye" FOV is the same thing as looking one way and then turning your head and looking in a different direction, correct?

By widening the field of view the author provided a fisheye effect like so:



That means lines around the line of sight are constantly warping around whatever you are looking. Alternatively, it may be a reverse fisheye FOV -- the author doesn't really say. None of this should be necessary to demonstrate the "celestial sphere". The effect of the "celestial sphere" needs to manifest from a natural consequence of geometry.

Stand just below a straight left-right line that is in front of you.  You might figure it out.

Did you gain access to a hallway yet?  When you see this same effect in that hallway, are you going to claim it isn't real?

What are you talking about? If you tape an arrow on a hallway ceiling, it points a straight line path to the end of the hallway. The lines aren't curved to produce an unnatural geometric result, as is with the "celestial sphere".

Tape an arrow on the wall at one end just below the ceiling, pointing it at a spot of equal height at the other end.  Standing a few feet from the wall, look at the arrow, and then look at where it's pointed.  The path along which the arrow is pointing will appear quite similar to the uppermost uninterrupted left/right line in the image you just posted.  Apply what you see to the moon and sun situation that is causing you so much confusion.   

Glad I could clear that up for you.

[Tom Bishop]

In your hallway example, the arrow always points in a straight line to its destination. It's not pointing in a curved line, as is necessary for the video in the OP to make any sense.

In the Muddy Colors blog link the observation this blogger makes in the sky is as so:



The moon's phase is angled upwards, but the sun is not yet above the horizon. There is no straight line path to the sun. The only way it will work is if the line is curved.

In your hallway example, there is no curving. If you place the arrow pointing down or up the hallway it will always make a straight line path to its destination.

Flatout cannot simulate such a scene of the moon pointing above the sun in a standard geometric 3D model, and so he must change the FOV of the scene to create a fisheye lens effect.

[Flatout]

Nothing is bent, Tom.  There is no fisheye effect turned on.

[Boots]

I'm no awesome video maker so you can critique all you like.  I just finished this one that maybe explains better.  My wife didn't get it so I thought I'd give it another go.  😁
My explanation could be wrong.  The model shows the illusion happening while everything is lined up.

That was great! I didn't mean to sound critical of your last video. It was helpful. This second one is even better though since it has more of an explanation.

Thanks!

[Jura-Glenlivet]

I just get this image of tom not daring to look at the sky when he goes out just in case the moon is there, refusing to look at the corners of his rooms and sitting in front of Flatouts video with his eyes closed and the sound off muttering prayers to Rowbotham.

[garygreen]

that image represents a 180 deg field of view, dummy

ironically, had you kept reading from that point, then you may have actually learned something:

Our view of the universe is, in a real sense, like a fish-eye photo. Your field of view is a sphere, not a flat plane. But we fail to notice, in part because of our inability to see it all at once, and in part due to the psychology of perception derived from the fact that our visual organs and the cortex that interprets their data focus on the center ... but also because we have been taught a formal way of interpreting the universe that insists on straight lines.

We tend to draw what we perceive in the center most area of our retina; our peripheral vision is an addendum. We rarely consider what's going on outside our center of focus unless it looks like it might eat us.

If you really concentrate on what's in your periphery without turning your head, you can see this curvature in the room you're in now, in the lines where wall meets ceiling and floor, and any piece of furniture parallel with them. Or stand in a narrow room like your powder room, two feet from the narrowest wall; look down and see the left and right margins of the wall receding toward a vanishing point below the floor. Now look up and see the same two parallel margins converging toward the opposite vanishing point above the ceiling. Those lines are ultimately curved, because they have to meet at one of two vanishing points on either side of you.

or whatever keep insisting that drawings are a better investigation of reality than your senses.  very zetetic.

[model 29]

In your hallway example, the arrow always points in a straight line to its destination. It's not pointing in a curved line

Correct.

, as is necessary for the video in the OP to make any sense.

Wrong.

In the Muddy Colors blog link the observation this blogger makes in the sky is as so:

Accompanied with the following text you ignored:

"Stretch this image out left to right until it encompasses about 180° and you'll get the picture. You would have to turn your head to look from impending sunrise to setting moon:"

This is rather dishonest of you Tom. 

The moon's phase is angled upwards, but the sun is not yet above the horizon. There is no straight line path to the sun.

Wrong.  The moon's day-night terminator is perpendicular to a 'straight line' to the sun.  Just like the arrow in the hallway pointing in a straight line to the other end.

The only way it will work is if the line is curved.

Wrong.

In your hallway example, there is no curving. If you place the arrow pointing down or up the hallway it will always make a straight line path to its destination.

Correct, But the same effect of the arrow 'appearing' to point higher is what is seen with the moon.

Flatout cannot simulate such a scene of the moon pointing above the sun in a standard geometric 3D model,

Actually he did.

and so he must change the FOV of the scene to create a fisheye lens effect.

This, coming from someone who took a narrowed representation of a wide-angle scene (even labeled as such by the creator), and tried to pass it off as a narrow field of view scene.  Again with the dishonesty Tom.  Disappointing.

[Tom Bishop]

Nothing is bent, Tom.  There is no fisheye effect turned on.

There is clearly something screwy with the FOV. When you pan to the left and right it looks like the moon and sun are warping around an inverted sphere.

Why is it that in your original video that you had to "zoom in" after this scene to get the desired effect rather than simply place your camera closer to the moon? Simply placing your camera next to the moon would be the simplest thing to do, and would more accurately represent the earth-sun-moon system.

Whatever you did there with the FOV is clearly unnatural. In the beforehand scene we clearly see that the moon is pointing at the sun, which I illustrated with a red line. If you take a magnifying glass to the moon in my image and follow the path to the sun it clearly makes a straight line.

We don't have zoom-in pincushion eyesight, or whatever inexplicable thing you did there to achieve your effect, so why are you trying to pass it off as reality?

[garygreen]

When you pan to the left and right it looks like the moon and sun are warping around an inverted sphere.

exactly.

so i'll try this one again: why are planetariums shaped like domes?  why do they project their images onto a spherical surface?  why not choose a cube or a pyramid?

[Flatout]

Nothing is bent, Tom.  There is no fisheye effect turned on.

There is clearly something screwy with the FOV. When you pan to the left and right it looks like the moon and sun are warping around an inverted sphere.

Why is it that in your original video that you had to "zoom in" after this scene to get the desired effect rather than simply place your camera closer to the moon? Simply placing your camera next to the moon would be the simplest thing to do, and would more accurately represent the earth-sun-moon system.

Whatever you did there with the FOV is clearly unnatural. In the beforehand scene we clearly see that the moon is pointing at the sun, which I illustrated with a red line. If you take a magnifying glass to the moon in my image and follow the path to the sun it clearly makes a straight line.

We don't have zoom-in pincushion eyesight, or whatever inexplicable thing you did there to achieve your effect, so why are you trying to pass it off as reality?

Tom, zooming in Rhinoceros perspective view  is the same a positioning the camera closer.  I use the software professionally.  I've designed countless airplane parts for composite fabrication with it.  You don't know what you are talking about.

[Tom Bishop]

Nothing is bent, Tom.  There is no fisheye effect turned on.

There is clearly something screwy with the FOV. When you pan to the left and right it looks like the moon and sun are warping around an inverted sphere.

Why is it that in your original video that you had to "zoom in" after this scene to get the desired effect rather than simply place your camera closer to the moon? Simply placing your camera next to the moon would be the simplest thing to do, and would more accurately represent the earth-sun-moon system.

Whatever you did there with the FOV is clearly unnatural. In the beforehand scene we clearly see that the moon is pointing at the sun, which I illustrated with a red line. If you take a magnifying glass to the moon in my image and follow the path to the sun it clearly makes a straight line.

We don't have zoom-in pincushion eyesight, or whatever inexplicable thing you did there to achieve your effect, so why are you trying to pass it off as reality?

Tom, zooming in Rhinoceros perspective view  is the same a positioning the camera closer.  I use the software professionally.  I've designed countless airplane parts for composite fabrication with it.  You don't know what you are talking about.

What would happen in the view you created if my red line were there connecting the sun to the moon? It would bend!

You clearly are trying to hand wave whatever effect you applied, or was inadvertently applied on a preset filter, away. In your original video you even bring up the words "wide angle" and "Field of View" when you "zoom in".

The person in the video in the OP did not need to zoom into the moon and change his "wide angle" view of the moon to see that it was not lined up with the sun. Shame on you.

[Tom Bishop]

When you pan to the left and right it looks like the moon and sun are warping around an inverted sphere.

exactly.

No, not exactly. When the man in the OP of this thread is pointing camera around at the moon and sun it does not look like they are curving on the inside of a sphere when he moves and pans his camera around to look at them. There is obviously some kind of camera effect here which is not reality.

[garygreen]

When you pan to the left and right it looks like the moon and sun are warping around an inverted sphere.

exactly.

No, not exactly. When the man in the OP of this thread is pointing camera around at the moon and sun it does not look like they are curving on the inside of a sphere when he moves and pans his camera around to look at them. There is obviously some kind of camera effect here which is not reality.

that's literally exactly how reality appears to us.

why do planetariums choose a spherical shape? why not project their images onto the inside of a cube or pyramid?

or, put another way: why is field of view measured in degrees? why do we use angles to describe that quantity?

[Tom Bishop]

that's literally exactly how reality appears to us.

why do planetariums choose a spherical shape? why not project their images onto the inside of a cube or pyramid?

or, put another way: why is field of view measured in degrees? why do we use angles to describe that quantity?

If this celestial sphere existed, the moon should curve against the inside of a sphere as it traveled across the sky, not when it is static and a camera is panning across it. The fact that the moon and sun seem to curve against an inverted sphere when the camera pans across it shows that there is something more going on in that video.

[TheTruthIsOnHere]

It doesn't matter how reality appears. Either the light from the Sun travels a straight line to the moon or it doesn't.

[Rama Set]

It doesn't matter how reality appears. Either the light from the Sun travels a straight line to the moon or it doesn't.

And it does. So... /thread?

[Tom Bishop]

In the Muddy Colors blog link the observation this blogger makes in the sky is as so:

Accompanied with the following text you ignored:

"Stretch this image out left to right until it encompasses about 180° and you'll get the picture. You would have to turn your head to look from impending sunrise to setting moon:"

This is rather dishonest of you Tom.

Do you know how a panorama works? It's NOT a celestial sphere.

why do planetariums choose a spherical shape? why not project their images onto the inside of a cube or pyramid?

or, put another way: why is field of view measured in degrees? why do we use angles to describe that quantity?

A planetarium is just a movie theater. They don't project the movies inside cubes because the corners are ugly.

Field of view is measured in degrees because if you look behind you, you need to turn your body 180 degrees. That does not mean that the celestial bodies are painted on an invisible sphere of glass circling the earth.

[garygreen]

just went out and did the string experiment for the first time.  works beautifully.

you should go out and do it this morning, tom.  if you're in the pacific time zone, then you should have a good view of both the sun and moon for the next 3-4 hours or so.

A planetarium is just a movie theater. They don't project the movies inside cubes because the corners are ugly.

what do you mean by "the corners are ugly"?

[model 29]

What would happen in the view you created if my red line were there connecting the sun to the moon? It would bend!

You clearly are trying to hand wave whatever effect you applied, or was inadvertently applied on a preset filter, away. In your original video you even bring up the words "wide angle" and "Field of View" when you "zoom in".

The person in the video in the OP did not need to zoom into the moon and change his "wide angle" view of the moon to see that it was not lined up with the sun. Shame on you.

I found the problem here Tom.  What you haven't figured out, is that the viewing distance to the moon is quite short compared to the distance from the moon to the sun.  We are viewing it from that "up close" viewpoint that is used in the 3d model video Flatout made.

[Nirmala]

just went out and did the string experiment for the first time.  works beautifully.

you should go out and do it this morning, tom.  if you're in the pacific time zone, then you should have a good view of both the sun and moon for the next 3-4 hours or so.

A planetarium is just a movie theater. They don't project the movies inside cubes because the corners are ugly.

what do you mean by "the corners are ugly"?

Corners are so ugly that they do not even allow them in regular movie theaters......oh wait......I have never seen a regular movie theater with a dome for a screen. Never mind.