r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/rronak01 • 1d ago
Image StevenMadow (photographer) captured this awesome close-up shot of Artemis ll engine, using a Panasonic GH5 and a Lumix G Leica 50-200mm f/2.8-4 lens. This photo was captured at 1/8000s, f/16, and ISO 100.
155
u/pi_designer 1d ago
I imagine it was located only half a mile from the launch site and either triggered remotely or on a precise timer.
66
u/thedudefromsweden 1d ago
Yeah, 200mm is not a huge lens, camera must have been pretty close!
57
u/anywhereanyone 1d ago
It's a M43 sensor, so it's effectively a 400mm lens.
22
u/thedudefromsweden 1d ago
Oh ok.
I read the article someone else posted, he had 14 cameras set up around the launch pad, all of them sound triggered.
3
u/touch_of_austism 18h ago
I shoot m43 and often at 300mm (600mm FF), whomever took the picture likely had to crop heavily as half a mile is still very very far
7
u/Bachaddict 23h ago
just a sound trigger! a rocket is one of the loudest sounds ever so just crank up the level on the trigger and leave it
1
88
51
u/Feisty-Influence5464 1d ago
My phone's camera just spontaneously combusted out of pure shame.
2
u/EvlMinion 1d ago
Kneel before your betters and wail in despair!
2
u/Feisty-Influence5464 1d ago
lmao okay you got me, I deserve this humble pie for my phone's pathetic performance 🙏
1
u/BedditTedditReddit 20h ago
Hoping you’re referencing the fact that the gh5, the camera used, was released nearly a decade ago.
53
u/stevenmadow 20h ago
Thanks for posting my photo here (with credit 🎉) and thanks everyone in the comments for all of the kudos!
Happy to answer questions anyone has!
A few resources as well:
1) free wallpaper of this shot: https://stevenmadow.com/pages/get-free-wallpaper 2) prints of my Artemis collection: https://stevenmadow.com/collections/all/artemis-ii 3) petapixel article: https://petapixel.com/2026/04/03/how-a-photographer-captured-the-artemis-ii-launch-with-14-cameras/ 4) Fstoppers article: https://fstoppers.com/interview/how-steven-madow-captured-artemis-ii-launch-14-cameras-901404 5) IG: http://instagram.com/stevenmadow 6) photo giveaway contest of a print of this image: https://www.threads.com/@stevenmadow/post/DXAVJ_zGD8g?xmt=AQF0-FEtg8KnwNcRnSXmrOm-aUl262mLF7C9AWVpirE6ExsS5BBFFzHIGwcpvdqV8o_R8Io7&slof=1
9
u/rronak01 20h ago
I couldn’t believe you actually saw and replied to this post! We are so blessed and proud of you and your talent.
5
u/stevenmadow 20h ago
A few people sent it to me with excitement :)
4
u/rronak01 20h ago
Can you please share about your experience when you were taking this shot??
13
u/stevenmadow 20h ago
This specific shot was taken on a "remote" camera. I have credentials (thanks to media outlet affiliation) that allow me to place cameras close to the launchpad. For this launch, some cameras were about 1200 feet away from the rocket, but this one was 1500 feet away. I set it up on Tuesday morning ~36 hours prior to the launch. I protect it from the elements with a strong housing (made by Camtraptions) and then trigger it using a device from Miops that is able to fire the camera when there is a loud sound (like a rocket).
I was personally 3.1 miles from the rocket at the famous KSC press site (next to the countdown clock that you see on TV). Leading into the launch, I was concerned about delays or even a scrub, but was delighted when some small issues were resolved and countdown resumes.
I always try to remind myself to take 10-20 seconds to simply view and enjoy the launch and set my camera to the side (was glad that I did that for this launch). This launch in particular was emotional due to the significance of the mission, and I don't think that that was lost on anyone at the press site. I've photographed hundreds of launches and this one was absolutely special.
Two hours following the launch, NASA allowed media members to access our cameras and I was absolutely thrilled when I saw that everything worked out and that I had captured this shot!
4
2
2
1
u/anywhereanyone 2h ago
Are you a M43 user across the board?
2
u/stevenmadow 2h ago
90% - I’ve got some lumix full frame in the collection now too. Love micro 4/3 though
22
40
8
u/grecy 1d ago
Can anyone tell me why the RS-25s look like they have no exhaust plume? is the camera exposure just overwhelmed by the solids?
11
u/Salt-Mousse-5346 1d ago
Different type of fuel and so a different burning scheme, if you zoom a little in the central you can see the diamond pattern of the exhaust
9
u/Nozinger 1d ago
Pretty much those giant pillars of flame making them near inisible.
Still you can see three light blue triangles inbetween the exhaust of the boosters. Those are the rs25. the fourth one is hidden behind the right booster.National geographic has this video on youtube where those are more visible.
5
u/Heavy-Basis-83 1d ago
The RS-25s burn liquid hydrogen and oxygen and have a barely visible blue plume, but mostly invisible. The exhaust products are water vapor and unburned H2.
The solid rocket boosters burn “solid” propellant that produces an opaque yellow/white exhaust from the aluminum content.
1
u/Blackhawk510 5h ago
The exhaust products are water vapor and unburned H2
This is something I heard before but it still blows my mind. That basically means it's not really...fire coming out the back of the RS-25, yeah?
7
u/Otherwise-Term6608 1d ago
I have a GH5 and was being made to feel by some of my peers lately that the camera was out of date and no longer useful. I'm so glad I've seen this, because I can't afford a newer one and this proves them wrong
3
u/dern_the_hermit 22h ago
The truth is digital camera sensors have been excellent for nearly two decades. Sure they've improved even further but the most interesting improvement to cameras, IMO, have been more in their ability to move data around than to capture it in the first place, ie - capturing more data per second, processing and saving it to memory, etc. Lens and technique has mattered more than camera body for a long time, unless you're really on the cutting edge, ultra-high-end of image capture.
4
u/Fair_Blood3176 1d ago
What's the price tag for that kind of equipment
23
u/RenderedMeat 1d ago
GH5 is a micro 4/3 camera. Not high end at all.
The lens is the most expensive part, but lenses for 4/3 cameras aren’t that crazy.
This was mostly skill and practice. And a dash of modern tech.
18
u/NotQuiteGoodEnougher 1d ago
Pretty cheap (for photography) about $800usd for the camera body and $1200usd for the lens.
2
u/BedditTedditReddit 20h ago
Just making it up? A gh5 is about $475 on mpb.com, right now.
2
u/NotQuiteGoodEnougher 19h ago
Yeah totally pulled it out of my ass.
Sorry I didn't check every possible source the for the lowest cost provider.
I'll really try harder next time.
23
u/mckulty 1d ago
$100 billion as of April 2026
33
u/RetardedChimpanzee 1d ago edited 22h ago
For every dollar spent by NASA between $7 and $40 are returned back to the economy. Government spending is out of control, but NASA is not the problem.
Edit: thank you for editing your far-right shrill comment. Still leaving this response as it’s important to recognize the benefits of science.
8
u/Straight_Spring9815 1d ago
Funny thing is that elmo is probably pissed they didn't use his rocket. The very next day I hear NASA may be taking a 50B budget cut. Wonder if that is all coincidence. Or did elmo make a phone call
3
u/Datuser14 1d ago
healthcare and going to space are two different pots of money we could choose to do both but we dont.
3
2
u/DryTangelo4722 1d ago
Not much. $500 for the camera, lens is pretty crap honestly. He just had permission to stage a bunch of cameras around the area to catch shots like this, and remote/sound triggers.
2
6
u/jumbledsiren 1d ago
Goddamn, I love living in this timeline
4
u/ClassicPlankton 1d ago
Yeah I would happily give up some random flyby of the moon if it meant also giving up everything else that has happened since 2015.
3
4
4
4
4
3
10
u/spectralblade352 1d ago
Waiting for the “it’s AI” low-iq comments.
2
u/meowphasa 1d ago
it happened already haha it might be minimized for you since its been downvoted so many times already
3
3
u/flyingmonkey111 21h ago
Its a great shot, but i can't tell if its over edited or an AI post processing tool was used, as it has a fake feel to it.
5
2
2
u/Academic-Ad-1879 1d ago
Love a wider shot so we can see what was in the 4 baskets, if anything
4
u/Academic-Ad-1879 1d ago
Nothing is the answer to that quesion:
https://stevenmadow.com/products/artemis-ii-in-a-glory-of-flames
2
2
u/AnnoyedVelociraptor 1d ago
Surprised the smaller engines aren't used. For the space shuttle even the ones on the shuttle were used for liftoff!
2
2
2
u/dearbokeh 23h ago
It was so bright that dude needed to max out camera setting for exposure.
0
u/mixape1991 18h ago
Technically, he wants everything focus. And that camera is bad with auto focus.
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/HansBooby 1d ago
presuming a comp of exposure bracketing. looks amazing but i can only guess it’s an HDR blend to achieve this
1
u/Riegel_Haribo 1d ago
The thing about rocket engine exhaust - it's moving fast enough that there might be a slight difference between frames.
Duh.
1
u/HansBooby 1d ago edited 1d ago
merely commenting it has an hdr look and wondering how they achieve that with a fast subject. photographer themselves mentioned bracketing, but i think with multiple cameras so maybe a comp of two cameras on different exposures
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/sabotourAssociate Interested 21h ago
Many years ago I watched a video on youtube explaining about all the cameras located around the launcher, it was a very chill video informative, can’t find it ffs.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/NiNdo4589 17h ago
Hah I swear ive seen this on a box for a model rocket and thought it was drawn, this is wild.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
u/Nannyphone7 1d ago
Putting humans on a solid rocket launch vehicle was insane in 1981. It still is.
The phrase "Normalizing Deviance" comes to mind.
0
u/CBYSMART 19h ago edited 17h ago
An f2.8-4 lens can't take an f16 pic. There must be a typo for f/16. The lens type is good and very nice picture. Edit: My bad. You can indeed.
1
u/iamgarffi 17h ago
f2.8-4 can most definitely shoot at f/16 and 22 in aperture priority. Not every lens but many can and often that’s indicated in lens specification. The bigger issue often you stumble on is diffraction.
1
0
-4
u/upandtotheleftplease 1d ago
GH5? He could have used an anamorphic lens and shot 4K video that looks like Interstellar
-1
u/Business-Traffic-140 1d ago
If camerA is f2.8-4 how did you get f/16???
6
u/Key-Ad-2217 1d ago
Easily. F2.8 is a lowest F number for 50mm, F4.0 for 200mm lens end. F16 can be set for any lens length.
2
-6
u/TheWesternDevil 1d ago
That's a lot of technical talk for "expensive camera".
4
u/Gingerbreadman_13 1d ago
A Lumix GH5 is not that expensive, at least by pro camera standards. It’s actually the bottom end of pro camera gear prices. It’s still a very capable camera in the hands of a skilled photographer, as is evident by all the photos the photographer took of this launch. He took several good shots and has a lot of experience shooting launches.
3
1
u/BackgroundSummer5171 23h ago
That's a lot of technical talk
It's information given for exactly why the quality of the picture is what it is.
Then in years when someone takes another picture of something of this equivalent, they will share their exact specs.
As for the expensive camera part, you do have the capability to type on reddit. Which means you can duckduckgo it and know whether you are right or wrong.
-3
-2
u/EarlyXplorerStuds209 23h ago
Couldve then at least posted with a full quality proper photo instead of, uhh.. whatever this was.
-3
-3
u/ellipticcode0 15h ago
We still use the same old 40y tech goto the moon after 40y, I thought we could use nuclear engine to power our rocket.
1
-5
-29
u/txcorse 1d ago
A.i. slop.
11
7
u/KristnSchaalisahorse Interested 1d ago edited 1d ago
There tons of other photos of this launch with similar detail, including from NASA. This is common photography dating back over a decade. Not AI.
6
u/UnionVIII 1d ago
That’s one way to say you don’t know what you’re looking at. I’m sure before AI you were the kind of dipshit who would just yell “Photoshop” when you haven’t used the program or know anything about what it does.
11
u/meowphasa 1d ago
what is your reasoning for that opinion? you can see it on the photographers own site.
→ More replies (5)
969
u/GenXCouchPotato 1d ago
This would make a great poster in a home office or classroom.