Kent UK - Bright squiggly line in photo of night sky [The star Vega + partial camera shake]
How does the photo compare with what you saw with the naked eye?
The filename says 20250425_005440 which suggests 00:54:40 (BST?) on 25 April - is that correct?
The filename says 20250425_005440 which suggests 00:54:40 (BST?) on 25 April - is that correct?
JMartJr
Senior Member.
The pic looks a lot like a moth flying during a longish exposure:
but if you saw it by eye as something odd in the sky that seems less likely!
which would be similarly shaped to the bright one of the object in question, but I'm not 100% sure it is not just noise and me seeing what I am looking for. But You'd expect that the brighter object would leave a brighter trail (or a visible trail at all) where less bright objects might not.
Can you describe what you SAW?
but if you saw it by eye as something odd in the sky that seems less likely!
I think maybe there is a trace of a "shaky hands trail" on the lowest star
which would be similarly shaped to the bright one of the object in question, but I'm not 100% sure it is not just noise and me seeing what I am looking for. But You'd expect that the brighter object would leave a brighter trail (or a visible trail at all) where less bright objects might not.
Can you describe what you SAW?
Correct, my eyesight is for short distance and at this time of night I didn't have contact lenses in. I saw from my blurry vision what looked like a star cluster, I got my camera to have a better look, that's what came out. I think the exposure was 1/10 of a second, hence my shaky hand theory. But then the other stars aren't smudged in a similar way. The most logical explanation I can think of.
I look another around that time of an object that crossed the sky from a similar location. It moved then stopped but was above a street light, that one also a bit strange but it stayed in the new location for some time until I lost interest and went to bed.
I think the 2nd photo looks weird but is likely the reflection, of the underneath of a helicopter, if indeed it is that. Could a drone maybe, but who flies a drone at that time of night.
Attachments
Basically just a fuzzy looking star cluster with the naked eye, but it got my interest sufficiently to grab my camera to see what if I could get a better view.
Mendel
Senior Member.
I'd be interested in the camera settings, which would normally be saved with the original photo. You uploaded an edited version that doesn't have them (and also suffered heavy compression).
You can use a site like https://www.metadata2go.com/ to view them; from there, you could copy the data here, leaving out the location data.
If there is no location data, it would help if you could share the original file.
You can use a site like https://www.metadata2go.com/ to view them; from there, you could copy the data here, leaving out the location data.
If there is no location data, it would help if you could share the original file.
John J.
Senior Member.
Welcome @Obi. Can your phone tell you what compass direction you were looking in? (Or maybe you have an old-school compass?) It might help rule out bright stars/ planets if we can match up the visible stars with constellations.
As far as you could see, did the light in the first picture stay in the same location?
Was it still present when you went back indoors?
The light source in question appears to be in the same position relative to the other stars in the photos in post #1 and post #4:
Maybe the trail is coincidental and not connected with the bright star: You see what seems like an unusually bright star or planet, and take a photo just as a moth or whatever flits past.
-Agreed that only one light source "smudging" might make a planet or star less likely; then again the smudged light appears to be the brightest in the photo, so I don't know if that makes a difference.
As far as you could see, did the light in the first picture stay in the same location?
Was it still present when you went back indoors?
The light source in question appears to be in the same position relative to the other stars in the photos in post #1 and post #4:
Maybe the trail is coincidental and not connected with the bright star: You see what seems like an unusually bright star or planet, and take a photo just as a moth or whatever flits past.
the only other "odd" photos I have are from just outside the O2, a few weeks back, 10th April. Don't know how to upload those though.
Thanks, is interesting thought, could it be a falling star or other astrological phenomena. Lines up with Acturus star according to Star Gazer -night sky app
Last edited:
John J.
Senior Member.
Probably not a meteor ("shooting star") as they tend to have quite straight paths. Usually very fleeting (fractions of a second).
I'm hoping it's not an astrological phenomenon, because it would mean much of my "world view" is wrong!
https://www.britannica.com/topic/astrologyExternal Quote:
https://www.britannica.com/science/astronomyExternal Quote:
Lines up with the star Acturus according to my app, could that be it, with shaky hand perhaps
Astronomy , oopsProbably not a meteor ("shooting star") as they tend to have quite straight paths. Usually very fleeting (fractions of a second).
I'm hoping it's not an astrological phenomenon, because it would mean much of my "world view" is wrong!
https://www.britannica.com/topic/astrologyExternal Quote:
https://www.britannica.com/science/astronomyExternal Quote:
Kyle Ferriter
Senior Member.
See this other recent thread linked below for examples of light trails in shaky long exposures of small bright objects in the sky. e.g. particularly bright stars, or planets. When taking a long exposure of stationary objects but in which the camera shakes, each light source travels the same path in the frame due to the shake, spending a small fraction of the exposure time at each point along that path. Dim points may not emit enough light for their intermediate points along those shake-caused paths to show up in the final capture. But bright points in frame may. This leads to situations where a bright point has a very visible light trail but other points do not.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/tw...ure-and-camera-motion-on-tracking-head.13979/
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/tw...ure-and-camera-motion-on-tracking-head.13979/
Not sure on the moth theory, shaky hand more likely
Mendel
Senior Member.
Thank you!
Metadata excerpt:
This confirms the exposure time was 1/10s, and the time was 00:54:45 (BST) on 25 April. (I don't know why the file name indicates 005440.)
I also don't know why the Shutterspeedvalue computes to 2^-0.9=0.54s with the APEX system?
Note also there's substantial digital zoom.
Metadata excerpt:
This confirms the exposure time was 1/10s, and the time was 00:54:45 (BST) on 25 April. (I don't know why the file name indicates 005440.)
I also don't know why the Shutterspeedvalue computes to 2^-0.9=0.54s with the APEX system?
Note also there's substantial digital zoom.
Yeah makes sense (digital zoom), it is far away, interesting on the file name is slightly different. I can rerun it perhaps, but that is what I got
Don't know what this means in layman's language, not my field #APEX value, clarification appreciated
I love this side by side. The star positions match identically, what is the thread though, zoom in and compare, this is now more intriguing, team, do your thing.
JMartJr
Senior Member.
I think I agree ... thought it does have a bit of the look of a moth track about it, it also looks like a shaky hand track, and as has been shown in the other thread linked in THIS POST that the fainter lights might not leave much of a track (and I still think there is a HINT of a similar track in the lower star), and with Arcturus being right there, I'd say a shaky handheld pic of Arcturus is what we're looking at, barring evidence to the contrary.
I agree. That's just the only thing in the image bright enough to leave a trail in the moving portion of the exposure.
Mendel
Senior Member.
The black stuff in the picture that surrounds the white dots and the white line was not actually there in the sky, it was added by the camera software on your phone. Possible culprits are the compression algorithm (these often introduce noticeable artifacts along edges) or the digital zoom (it adds pixels based on guesswork) or possibly "AI" on modern phones.
When you tap the shutter button, you introduce a short jerk, and after that, the phone may be more steady. We are theorizing that the squiggly line could represent that jerk. Basically, every white dot in the picture should leave such a line, but it'd be much fainter than the dot itself and doesn't show up against the rather bright background; it's only noticeable for the big dot because that is overexposed and much brighter than the others. If you look very closely, the other dot that I cropped out may have that line visible very faintly, including the small dot where it starts. The strong zoom amplifies the size of the jerk.
The other theory is that the squiggly line represents something small that was actually moving near you, illuminated by a nearby light source. But it'd be a big coincidence for it to end up at the big dot (Arcturus?), and 1/10s seems too short an exposure time for this (maybe if the exposure was actually 1/2s).
You wouldn't be the first person surprised by a particularly bright star. Some famous UFO reports came about because someone saw a star or a planet.
Last edited:
Mendel
Senior Member.
The Samsung camera app on my tablet can be set to take pictures at different formats, including 1:1 (square); this setting persists. If the last picture I took was square, my next quick snapshot of the night sky would also be square, unless I deliberately changed the format.
Article: HEICs offer a much more efficient, modern compression method than the older JPEG format. HEICs break images into significantly smaller files without affecting quality.
HEICs, while also a lossy file format, tend to retain better image quality over time. They also store editing information, so even once you've saved edits to an image, you can reverse them in the future.
Last edited:
Aah interesting, flicking through I see my last several photos are square. Thanks for that will test and see if I can reset. Also, the 2nd picture has much larger file size, the one without the trails. So, might be we have this solved, shaky hand plus digital zoomed perhaps. I am looking at the photo on the phone and it also states 263KB as pointed out Mick. To get to laptop, I copy paste to onedrive and then change format to jpeg. I zipped the originals directly into a few attachments here to help retain the OG heic formats, with associated meta data. It seems the most likely outcome is it is the star mentioned earlier, with some sort of distortion with the high zoom resulting in lower picture fidelity. Incredible, surely, the strangest night sky picture I have ever taken. Thanks guys.
I think this is it.
Thanks team, seems we have it cracked, shaky hand, plus heavy digital zoom, plus square format on photo on camera. It must be the star Arcturus, in the constellation of Bootes. Thanks for the help, and for teaching me about camera formats and metadata. Great forum! Have reset camera settings and see you can also set 50mega pixel setting. Will try this tonight if the sky is clear and try for a similar orientation at higher resolution to compare. Great exercise
Mendel
Senior Member.
That's a good idea!
If my maths is correct, you should see the same stars in the same place ~20 minutes earlier than you did 5 days ago, if that's what you're looking for.
You could try for some deliberately jerky shutter pushes.
And you could take comparison pictures with and without digital zoom.
Will do
Alien Chess Fiend
Active Member
The bright star is Vega. Much brighter than the others so it makes sense for it to be the only one with a visible trail.
