Here's 8 hours of the recent space walk and such. I can

Neatttt. So weird seeing him not fall when they switch to helmetcam.

>>8317896
Thanks a lot anon. Love this shit!

>>8318033
>Orbit.
He is falling you dumb faggot.

>>8317896
The astronauts are tethered to the station at all times right? What is the procedure if they become untethered and start drifting away from the station?

>>8318053
The astronaut is supposed to open his emergency rear flap and ignite his miniature methane thruster.

>>8317896
How long until the flat-Earthers get here?

>>8317896

the earthy is actually flat

its not rounded like in the picture - only because of the camera used

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhRiLP32qfs

>>8317896
QUESTION:

How come we can't see millions of stars/Milky Way in the background?

>>8318053
They cut a hole in their glove

>>8318135
>>8318296
>>8318327

: ^ )
^
)

>>8318336
Serious question though - wanting to learn. Light pollution?

>>8318346
>Light pollution?
Nah, it has to do with the camera exposure or something. I'm not a cameraologist (photography is for gay hipsters) so I don't know exactly.

>>8318346
Presumably you're star guy.

The reason is exposure. If ou expose an image enough to show the stars you'll overexpose the earth - it will appear too bright in the image.

>>8318327
>>8318346
>How come we can't see millions of stars/Milky Way in the background?
Because it's daytime, and the stars are only out at night.

Seriously; There's a maximum difference in brightness that eyes and cameras can capture in a singe image. So if footage of space is taken where a day-lit object fills a large fraction of the camera's field of view, it's going to wash out any stars that would otherwise be visible.

I've found this actually makes for a great test for the authenticity of photos from space - few artists can pass up drawing a starry sky.

>>8318346
You can see them in OPs image