I always thought it was very interesting how we can technically see things infinitely far away from us since we are receiving its light rays literally every split moment (well assuming the atmosphere doesn't distort or block it). It is just that the rays take up such a small proportion of all the rays our eyes receive and it would take a lot of magnifying power to make things far away from us visible. I guess that's what telescopes are really.
jasonTelanoff
I agree that that's an interesting thought. To add to what you mentioned about atmospheric distortion, how could we account for with math and code. I've seen sky renderers that estimate this, but nothing that actually distorts things like the atmosphere does.
grafour
This is a bit confusing since 0 means the image is infinitely small (or none). However, this is a good approx since the mountain is prob inf far from the camera's POV of the photo.
I always thought it was very interesting how we can technically see things infinitely far away from us since we are receiving its light rays literally every split moment (well assuming the atmosphere doesn't distort or block it). It is just that the rays take up such a small proportion of all the rays our eyes receive and it would take a lot of magnifying power to make things far away from us visible. I guess that's what telescopes are really.
I agree that that's an interesting thought. To add to what you mentioned about atmospheric distortion, how could we account for with math and code. I've seen sky renderers that estimate this, but nothing that actually distorts things like the atmosphere does.
This is a bit confusing since 0 means the image is infinitely small (or none). However, this is a good approx since the mountain is prob inf far from the camera's POV of the photo.