pindz wrote:
sorry but nothing as "prism effect" doesnt exist .. google it ..
Its called Chromatic Abberration, and it does exist, and it does explain this color around the moon
which comes from the shitty ass lens in his hamster driven, bicycle pedal-powered cell phone camera.
The moon has no atmosphere, because it doesn't have enough gravity.
Pindz wouldnt know this, because they don't allow girls to attend school in his third world country.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossar ... ion_01.htmhttp://toothwalker.org/optics/chromatic.html


"Purple fringing: lens or sensor?
Chromatic aberration, and purple fringing in particular, have received considerable attention with the advent of digital cameras. Indeed, although chromatic aberrations can be noticed on film (Fig. 7), they do look more intense on CCD or CMOS images. On the one hand the digital photographer is only a few mouse clicks away from a full screen display, and few lenses stand image inspection at high magnification. On the other hand it is possible that digital imaging somehow renders the color fringes due to chromatic aberration more distinct. One of the proposed mechanisms is an enhanced spectral sensitivity in the (ultra)violet and (infra)red regimes, where lenses tend to be poorly corrected for chromatic aberration. Purple fringing is often blamed on sensor bloom, which is odd as blooming is a quite different phenomenon [15, 16]. In fact, there are as many arguments against sensor bloom as there are in favor of chromatic aberration to account for purple fringing. The examples shown on the present page are all demonstrably due to the lens and not to the sensor. Sensor bloom has no known color preference, and if it had, it would not change its colors upon defocusing a lens (as in Fig. 3) or upon swapping lenses (as in Fig. 4). The list of arguments is long [17]."
_________________

pindz wrote:
Marduk you are doing a big idiot from yourself ...

pindz wrote:
i dont give shit if your tractor doesnt work