Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lunar Libration

Lunar Libration

 * Reason:It is an animation of excellent quality which clearly depicts lunar phases and libration.
 * Articles this image appears in:Lunar phase
 * Creator:Tomruen


 * Support as nominator --RobertJWalker | Talk 20:39, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Excellent quality. Dog  poster  20:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Durova  371 22:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. This is fascinating and an excellent illustration of the moon. I wonder how it was made and what equipment was used. Snowman (talk) 23:56, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! It is a computer simulation, using albedo maps from the Clementine spacecraft, . A comparative animation from real photos is on APOD . My simulation has no topographic shadows visible in the craters, but good for overall geometry, smoother than real photos can be. There's another animation without phase at libration. Tom Ruen (talk) 04:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I would like to see more than one cycle to see more of the moon's movement. Would the sequence be easier to see if it ran slower? Would it be better if the viewer was presented with a static image with controls to start (and stop) the animation. I do not know the answers. Snowman (talk) 10:16, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Animated gifs are limited. I've experimented with Windows movie maker, for *.wmv format, see another experiment, 12+ cycles for 2010: . Wiki has a movie format of some sort, but I don't know how to create it. Tom Ruen (talk) 21:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Can you make a southern hemisphere one as well? Elekhh (talk) 01:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * North is up, and certainly images could be inverted for south up on another version. Here's another calendar version, showing the orientation of the moon for 45N for one cycle, so viewing orientation changes a lot more with latitude than fixing north as up. File:Moon phase calendar May2005.png Tom Ruen (talk) 05:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I kinda like this one better, since it runs smoother. Maybe this one is running slow on my monitor?  Zoo Fari  03:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I can make new images as well, for appearances for a month of 2009 or 2010, larger or smaller, or less frames. Tom Ruen (talk) 05:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose If it's a computer simulation then they could of done a far better job of the repeat point so it doesn't have a very obvious jump in position. If it's actual pictures of the moon then that could maybe be forgiven, but if it's just a computer 3d render to simulate it then the missing frames or whatever is missing that is causing that big jump is distracting to the eye. Also regardless if this does get prompted then it should be replacing the older FP since it is higher resolution. — raeky ( talk 06:18, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * There's no missing frame, although more care might be done to minimize the jump. The jump is reality because it's cycling a single month, while each month looks a little different. The libration motion is a mixture of different periods which never repeat perfectly. Tom Ruen (talk) 20:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * As a computer simulation there is _no reason_ it can't be smooth. — raeky ( talk 15:36, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, thanks for your _expert knowledge_. Tom Ruen (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. It runs pretty fast on my computer - I can't watch it for more than a few seconds without getting a headache. Mostlyharmless (talk) 06:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

--jjron (talk) 11:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree animations are dizzy things, unsure what to do about it except making them smaller helps. Tom Ruen (talk) 21:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * One could make the last frame last for a few seconds. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Definitely an option. Tom Ruen (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Support—excellent value and more than sufficient technical quality. —Ynhockey (Talk) 15:43, 9 December 2009 (UTC)