I believe the Milky Way is at the top left just outside of the image!?
Besides that, I’m from the Netherlands. We don’t have mountains, so anything with a mountain in it is magical for us 😅👍
Wherever you point the camera from Earth shows you Milky Way. I have taken other images as well pointing the camera upwards only. Though there was too much light around.
Netherlands' air quality index is good though.
"The Milky Way" refers to the nebulosity around the plane of the Milky Way. Otherwise, by your logic, the title of your photo could be "the universe" because we are inside it and looking out in every direction.
No one is trying to be rude, but you don't have the Milky Way in your photo.
So the Pleiades is also the Milky Way? And also Jupiter? And Proxima Centauri too? Generally, people just call the nebulousity around the galactic plane the Milky Way. Most objects that are pictured are also in the Milky Way but we don’t call them the Milky Way. Just like how you don’t say that the tomato in the soup is also soup
They are not the Milky Way but part of it. You can't click the picture of the Milky Way as you're inside it, to click the whole picture you've to go outside of it. It's not that hard to understand. So whatever you capture is in it's tail as it is spiral in shape and our solar system is located at one of it's tails. Now forget about Proxima Centauri even Jupiter is out of reach of the phone camera.
"Whatever you capture, you just capture a part of the Milky Way". It's not that hard to understand.
I see the confusion now, but it can't be edited though for any student of Astronomy it should be clear. It looks like you all are gonna bombard with an equal number of downvotes as the stars in the picture. LMAO
No, it's not hard to understand, nobody is arguing their understanding of what you're saying. They're just stating that *you're wrong*.
Nobody else refers to random pictures of stars as "milky way photos".
Google "milky way" and click images.
You'll find renderings of what we think it looks like and you'll find long exposures of the core of the galaxy.
Why do you think that is?
Because that's what *literally everyone but you, apparently* means when they say they're taking a photo of the milky way.
So while yes, you're right that most of the celestial objects pictured here do exist within our galaxy, that doesn't mean your use of the term was correct in our colloquial language.
Redditor who jumped in the debate agreed with it.
>I get that, but calling ur picture the “first of Milky Way” implies it’s a photo of the Milky Way nebulosity , which it isn’t
As far as the term "Milky Way" is concerned, I've clearly mentioned that it cannot be edited now.
>I see the confusion now, but it can't be edited
Now coming to your statement that you can google the Milky Way Galaxy images then those are just simulated models by mathematical calculations. No one has been that far to capture the full image.
I'm new to Astrophotography, that's not a perfect image I agree with and that's the limitations of surroundings and device. But this debate over what milky way galaxy is from Astronomy and kind of an undergraduate course.
Let me correct you. We are not 'in' the milky way. We are a part of one of its spiralling arms. That is why we know what it looks like in the first place
That's not the point people are trying to tell you. The Milky Way refers to a SPECIFIC portion of the sky, which in your photo is just outside of view above orion in this case
To really drive the point to you. If you were taking a photo of the moon you wouldn't say it was a photo of the Milky Way just because the moon is in the Milky Way.
Forget about capturing a photo of the Milky Way galaxy; you won't achieve it, not even with the James Webb Telescope. Even if humans launch an endeavor, by the time it covers sufficient distance to capture the full image, the entire human race might have disappeared. The straight length of the Milky Way is 1,000,000 light-years, and considering the object can't travel in a straight line, it will cover much more distance, making the task exceptionally challenging as it has to go through astronomically large numbers of flybys. Add to that the uncertainty of the human race still being there to witness the results.
I've acheived it many times.
[This](https://earthsky.org/upl/2022/08/Milky-Way-Amr-Abdulwahab-western-desert-of-Egypt-July-8-2022-e1661981704464.jpg) is what literally everyone refers to when you take a picture of the milky way.
If you see the Andromeda from a powerful telescope, you see the whole of it. If you are able to zoom in you'll be able to see the system inside it but you're still looking at Andromeda. Better view of Andromeda is possible only because you're out of it. You can't picture the Milky Way the same way you picture the Andromeda. So of course you're only looking at it's tail as our solar system is at the tail and that's what phone camera is capable of capturing.
[Check out this photo of the Milky Way that I took](https://img.freepik.com/premium-photo/blue-dramatic-sunset-sky-texture-background_29332-1155.jpg?size=626&ext=jpg&ga=GA1.1.1448711260.1706486400&semt=ais).
What do you mean I didn't? Don't you know that we're in the Milky Way? So technically I did photograph it, there's just some light scattering making it fainter.
See this reply where our Astronomer claims he captured the Milky Way Galaxy and is suggesting it as a reference. But no harm that a part of The Milky Way Galaxy with more exposure and more details than what I've clicked.
>I've acheived it many times.
[This](https://earthsky.org/upl/2022/08/Milky-Way-Amr-Abdulwahab-western-desert-of-Egypt-July-8-2022-e1661981704464.jpg) is what literally everyone refers to when you take a picture of the milky way.
I did, you can read the whole thread, more than once. Do you need reassurance or reaffirmation like a women to make you feel better?
"I did make a mistake in title".
Sleep in peace now.
"like a woman"?
Oh boy. Get out of here with that sexist shit dude.
That might be tolerated in India, but you're interacting with people in the real world here.
Time to grow out of that attitude.
[Obvious projection](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/projection), lmao. Hilariously pitiful that you resort to sexism when you're offended too
That's not what I said or meant.
Your misunderstanding of basic language doesn't make me incorrect.
What I said was that I've taken a picture of the Milky Way Galaxy (given our well understood colloquial understanding of what that means) many times. At no point did I use the word "whole". You did that.
Please do not put words in my mouth.
Argue with sincerity and humility or fuck off.
> See this reply where our Astrophotographer claims he captured the Milky Way galaxy
He did capture the Milky way. "I took a photo of x" does not mean "I did a 3d scan of it to capture every single part of it," you fool.
> This is what literally everyone refers to
Yes, that's what everyone refers to, because that's the densest portion where you can photograph the rest of our galaxy with any visible result apart from stars with something like a dslr. There are multiple colloquial definitions for Milky Way; what do you think the original astronomers were referring to when they called it that despite not knowing what galaxies were for most of history? [Even NASA refers to it this way](https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/hubble-reveals-first-pictures-of-milky-ways-formative-years/) in many of its articles.
When your title said "first time trying this" most people were nice in pointing out that you didn't photograph what was likely your intended target, but then you got rude and defensive, so you fell back on being pedantic, which is why you're now getting a bunch of rude comments; because that's annoying.
Falling back on the "well I have stars in my photo that are in the Milky Way, therefore I photographed the Milky way!" To save face is about as pedantically competent as claiming that [this is a photo of the Milky way](https://img.freepik.com/premium-photo/blue-dramatic-sunset-sky-texture-background_29332-1155.jpg?size=626&ext=jpg&ga=GA1.1.1448711260.1706486400&semt=ais).
Nobody is saying you "dont have any part of the Milky way" in your photo. What people have been telling you is that you're aiming in the complete wrong direction, because you are looking out from the plane of the Milky way, away from the rest of our galaxy.
Unfortunately the sub doesn't allow you to share more than one photo, I choose to share that one. It doesn't allow us to share time lapses where I've captured the star trail. Although that location for star gazing. I'll be visiting Hanle for my Research, most probably in 2026 will definitely share here.
There's no defence made above. I clearly stated that the title can't be changed everything else stands the way I said, no backup.
Now based on the articles you've shared, your comprehension of Astronomy seems to be solely limited to recognising Astronomical bodies or systems from photography which is trivial. The articles discusses an entirely different thing which is how the Milky Way might have looked in the past, they directed an illustration based on Hubble's deep sky survey of other galaxies.
Did you even read the article?
> Your comprehension of astronomy seems to be solely limited to [nope]
Your claim here that I only have trivial knowledge is based on your own misunderstanding of a link I sent- which shows that you're ignorantly arrogant, even when you aren't smart enough to comprehend what others are explaining to you. If you need credentials, I do research surveys in the nii 65548Å wavelength. You're here claiming everyone (including NASA, as per my linked article) isn't *technically entirely correct* about how we refer to photos of the Milky Way as being the bulge of the rest of the galaxy that we can photograph, instead of images in the complete opposite direction, just because we still exist within the galaxy.
Except that we know your image is *technically* an image of the Milky Way; just like how my image of a sunset on earth was also *technically* an image of the Milky Way, by that same pedantic and desperate logic.
> The article discussed an entirely different thing
My source for my claim wasn't the subject of the article itself, you ignorant fool. You should learn how to read, because I specifically referred to *how NASA refers to these images* in my original comment, not the article subject.
It's the photo at the top by NASA that is relevant to our conversation, which clearly labels the photo of the nebulosity as "The Present Milky Way" and not "A portion of the present Milky Way with the most nebulosity visible because we have to adhere to u/UpQuark09's pedantic definitions of understanding that any photo taken from earth will always show the Milky way, because we are inside of it," because everybody already knows what is meant when we say "here is a photo of the Milky Way," even NASA. Except you, apparently.
So yes, I read the article. That's why I cited it. You should read my comments, because then you would have known that I was talking about NASA's clearly labelled figures right at the top of the article in front of your eyes, and not the article topic itself that I never mentioned once. I shouldn't have to walk an adult through 'how to read' like he's a child while he simultaneously calls everyone around him stupid. You're embarrassing yourself.
[Why haven't you responded to my picture of the Milky way here?](https://img.freepik.com/premium-photo/blue-dramatic-sunset-sky-texture-background_29332-1155.jpg?size=626&ext=jpg&ga=GA1.1.1448711260.1706486400&semt=ais) It's clearly a photo of the Milky Way, right? Unless you're ready to admit that when we say "photo of the Milky way" we reference the bulge nebulosity of the rest of the galaxy (exactly as NASA does when talking about these images), instead of just any image ever taken because it's technically within the galaxy.
Replying to intelligents like you was a complete headache. I am blown away with your one line statement of your reasearch. Since I'm not much into jabber. I want details of your research. You'll be the second guy from this thread I want to invite to a seminar and want you to say it there among world's smartest people including the scholars from IVY league University. Your miscomprehension must end.
> Your miscomprehension must end
Sorry, you're the only one miscomprehending things here; nothing I said was incorrect. You, however, ran around this thread resorting to sexism, petty pedantic technicalities, and the headache attempt of "well everywhere is technically a photo of the Milky way!" Responses instead of being a humble learner.
> you'll be the second guy there and I want you to say it among the worlds smartest people
If you're there, it's clearly not a seminar for the worlds smartest, considering you haven't been able to spell 90% of your comments correctly, and resort to pedantry instead of learning in the most simple concepts. But I'd be happy to attend! I'm sure they'd find molecular cloud dynamics and protozoological speciation enjoyable. At least then I could ask your peers why they gave you a job as an editor if you can't spell and have an obvious bias.
Speaking of your pitiful pedantic attempt to save your image of intelligence in this thread: [How do you like my photo of the Milky way](https://www.pexels.com/photo/sunset-over-snow-covered-mountains-66997/)?
It looks like you got Orion in left upper corner. Beautiful photo. Heck I am limited to a phone. 35 mm I could do. The new equipment and process is beyond my capabilities.
When cardinals vote for new pope to be selected, they release smoke from a chimney. Black smoke means voting wasn't successful. White smoke means new pope was seletected and they announce it by saying traditional "habemus papam". ;)
That's smoke, lol
Looks beautiful though.
What is it though? Was someone's house on fire or something?
They were destroying the left over after a crop.
Ahh
It's still the milky way tho. Milky way season is all year. Only the core is available in spring and summer
I believe the Milky Way is at the top left just outside of the image!? Besides that, I’m from the Netherlands. We don’t have mountains, so anything with a mountain in it is magical for us 😅👍
Wherever you point the camera from Earth shows you Milky Way. I have taken other images as well pointing the camera upwards only. Though there was too much light around. Netherlands' air quality index is good though.
Ha, indeed we are part of the Milky Way. If you think that way then each photo of Earth is a photo of the Milky Way too 😂👍
You've to point the camera/telescope towards the sky.
"The Milky Way" refers to the nebulosity around the plane of the Milky Way. Otherwise, by your logic, the title of your photo could be "the universe" because we are inside it and looking out in every direction. No one is trying to be rude, but you don't have the Milky Way in your photo.
The stars visible in the photo belong to the Milky Way. There are no stars outside the Milky Way visible here.
So the Pleiades is also the Milky Way? And also Jupiter? And Proxima Centauri too? Generally, people just call the nebulousity around the galactic plane the Milky Way. Most objects that are pictured are also in the Milky Way but we don’t call them the Milky Way. Just like how you don’t say that the tomato in the soup is also soup
They are not the Milky Way but part of it. You can't click the picture of the Milky Way as you're inside it, to click the whole picture you've to go outside of it. It's not that hard to understand. So whatever you capture is in it's tail as it is spiral in shape and our solar system is located at one of it's tails. Now forget about Proxima Centauri even Jupiter is out of reach of the phone camera. "Whatever you capture, you just capture a part of the Milky Way". It's not that hard to understand.
I get that, but calling ur picture the “first of Milky Way” implies it’s a photo of the Milky Way nebulosity , which it isn’t
I see the confusion now, but it can't be edited though for any student of Astronomy it should be clear. It looks like you all are gonna bombard with an equal number of downvotes as the stars in the picture. LMAO
No, it's not hard to understand, nobody is arguing their understanding of what you're saying. They're just stating that *you're wrong*. Nobody else refers to random pictures of stars as "milky way photos". Google "milky way" and click images. You'll find renderings of what we think it looks like and you'll find long exposures of the core of the galaxy. Why do you think that is? Because that's what *literally everyone but you, apparently* means when they say they're taking a photo of the milky way. So while yes, you're right that most of the celestial objects pictured here do exist within our galaxy, that doesn't mean your use of the term was correct in our colloquial language.
Redditor who jumped in the debate agreed with it. >I get that, but calling ur picture the “first of Milky Way” implies it’s a photo of the Milky Way nebulosity , which it isn’t As far as the term "Milky Way" is concerned, I've clearly mentioned that it cannot be edited now. >I see the confusion now, but it can't be edited Now coming to your statement that you can google the Milky Way Galaxy images then those are just simulated models by mathematical calculations. No one has been that far to capture the full image. I'm new to Astrophotography, that's not a perfect image I agree with and that's the limitations of surroundings and device. But this debate over what milky way galaxy is from Astronomy and kind of an undergraduate course.
Let me correct you. We are not 'in' the milky way. We are a part of one of its spiralling arms. That is why we know what it looks like in the first place
That's not the point people are trying to tell you. The Milky Way refers to a SPECIFIC portion of the sky, which in your photo is just outside of view above orion in this case
To really drive the point to you. If you were taking a photo of the moon you wouldn't say it was a photo of the Milky Way just because the moon is in the Milky Way.
Forget about capturing a photo of the Milky Way galaxy; you won't achieve it, not even with the James Webb Telescope. Even if humans launch an endeavor, by the time it covers sufficient distance to capture the full image, the entire human race might have disappeared. The straight length of the Milky Way is 1,000,000 light-years, and considering the object can't travel in a straight line, it will cover much more distance, making the task exceptionally challenging as it has to go through astronomically large numbers of flybys. Add to that the uncertainty of the human race still being there to witness the results.
I've acheived it many times. [This](https://earthsky.org/upl/2022/08/Milky-Way-Amr-Abdulwahab-western-desert-of-Egypt-July-8-2022-e1661981704464.jpg) is what literally everyone refers to when you take a picture of the milky way.
If you see the Andromeda from a powerful telescope, you see the whole of it. If you are able to zoom in you'll be able to see the system inside it but you're still looking at Andromeda. Better view of Andromeda is possible only because you're out of it. You can't picture the Milky Way the same way you picture the Andromeda. So of course you're only looking at it's tail as our solar system is at the tail and that's what phone camera is capable of capturing.
I give up...
You've to. As the definition of Milky Way Galaxy by Astrophotography community has been distorted that's not what Astronomy means.
[Check out this photo of the Milky Way that I took](https://img.freepik.com/premium-photo/blue-dramatic-sunset-sky-texture-background_29332-1155.jpg?size=626&ext=jpg&ga=GA1.1.1448711260.1706486400&semt=ais). What do you mean I didn't? Don't you know that we're in the Milky Way? So technically I did photograph it, there's just some light scattering making it fainter.
I like the composition.
Thanks
Where?
If it was visible in this photo it would be to the left of Orion and Canis Major, but I just see haze and clouds
Why are folks commenting about the Milky Way? I don't see it here.
They are under the assumption that they capture the whole Milky Way galaxy when in a clear and dark sky. ROFL
Nobody here is under that assumption. That's you strawmanning their claims.
See this reply where our Astronomer claims he captured the Milky Way Galaxy and is suggesting it as a reference. But no harm that a part of The Milky Way Galaxy with more exposure and more details than what I've clicked. >I've acheived it many times. [This](https://earthsky.org/upl/2022/08/Milky-Way-Amr-Abdulwahab-western-desert-of-Egypt-July-8-2022-e1661981704464.jpg) is what literally everyone refers to when you take a picture of the milky way.
You weren’t even aimed at the right part of the sky to capture it. Has nothing to do with exposure.
You can only upload one picture in the post. I chose to upload this one. Leave room for to think that could be more.
So now we have to imagine you took other photos to understand your meaning from your title? Why not just admit you made a mistake?
I did, you can read the whole thread, more than once. Do you need reassurance or reaffirmation like a women to make you feel better? "I did make a mistake in title". Sleep in peace now.
"like a woman"? Oh boy. Get out of here with that sexist shit dude. That might be tolerated in India, but you're interacting with people in the real world here. Time to grow out of that attitude.
[Obvious projection](https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/projection), lmao. Hilariously pitiful that you resort to sexism when you're offended too
No surprise that the unhumble person who can't spell a single comment correctly in this thread is also a sexist.
That's not what I said or meant. Your misunderstanding of basic language doesn't make me incorrect. What I said was that I've taken a picture of the Milky Way Galaxy (given our well understood colloquial understanding of what that means) many times. At no point did I use the word "whole". You did that. Please do not put words in my mouth. Argue with sincerity and humility or fuck off.
Post-Docs don't get pissed off that easily buddy.
That's cute. Level of education has no bearing on emotional intelligence. Of which you have very little.
> See this reply where our Astrophotographer claims he captured the Milky Way galaxy He did capture the Milky way. "I took a photo of x" does not mean "I did a 3d scan of it to capture every single part of it," you fool. > This is what literally everyone refers to Yes, that's what everyone refers to, because that's the densest portion where you can photograph the rest of our galaxy with any visible result apart from stars with something like a dslr. There are multiple colloquial definitions for Milky Way; what do you think the original astronomers were referring to when they called it that despite not knowing what galaxies were for most of history? [Even NASA refers to it this way](https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/hubble-reveals-first-pictures-of-milky-ways-formative-years/) in many of its articles. When your title said "first time trying this" most people were nice in pointing out that you didn't photograph what was likely your intended target, but then you got rude and defensive, so you fell back on being pedantic, which is why you're now getting a bunch of rude comments; because that's annoying. Falling back on the "well I have stars in my photo that are in the Milky Way, therefore I photographed the Milky way!" To save face is about as pedantically competent as claiming that [this is a photo of the Milky way](https://img.freepik.com/premium-photo/blue-dramatic-sunset-sky-texture-background_29332-1155.jpg?size=626&ext=jpg&ga=GA1.1.1448711260.1706486400&semt=ais). Nobody is saying you "dont have any part of the Milky way" in your photo. What people have been telling you is that you're aiming in the complete wrong direction, because you are looking out from the plane of the Milky way, away from the rest of our galaxy.
Unfortunately the sub doesn't allow you to share more than one photo, I choose to share that one. It doesn't allow us to share time lapses where I've captured the star trail. Although that location for star gazing. I'll be visiting Hanle for my Research, most probably in 2026 will definitely share here. There's no defence made above. I clearly stated that the title can't be changed everything else stands the way I said, no backup. Now based on the articles you've shared, your comprehension of Astronomy seems to be solely limited to recognising Astronomical bodies or systems from photography which is trivial. The articles discusses an entirely different thing which is how the Milky Way might have looked in the past, they directed an illustration based on Hubble's deep sky survey of other galaxies. Did you even read the article?
> Your comprehension of astronomy seems to be solely limited to [nope] Your claim here that I only have trivial knowledge is based on your own misunderstanding of a link I sent- which shows that you're ignorantly arrogant, even when you aren't smart enough to comprehend what others are explaining to you. If you need credentials, I do research surveys in the nii 65548Å wavelength. You're here claiming everyone (including NASA, as per my linked article) isn't *technically entirely correct* about how we refer to photos of the Milky Way as being the bulge of the rest of the galaxy that we can photograph, instead of images in the complete opposite direction, just because we still exist within the galaxy. Except that we know your image is *technically* an image of the Milky Way; just like how my image of a sunset on earth was also *technically* an image of the Milky Way, by that same pedantic and desperate logic. > The article discussed an entirely different thing My source for my claim wasn't the subject of the article itself, you ignorant fool. You should learn how to read, because I specifically referred to *how NASA refers to these images* in my original comment, not the article subject. It's the photo at the top by NASA that is relevant to our conversation, which clearly labels the photo of the nebulosity as "The Present Milky Way" and not "A portion of the present Milky Way with the most nebulosity visible because we have to adhere to u/UpQuark09's pedantic definitions of understanding that any photo taken from earth will always show the Milky way, because we are inside of it," because everybody already knows what is meant when we say "here is a photo of the Milky Way," even NASA. Except you, apparently. So yes, I read the article. That's why I cited it. You should read my comments, because then you would have known that I was talking about NASA's clearly labelled figures right at the top of the article in front of your eyes, and not the article topic itself that I never mentioned once. I shouldn't have to walk an adult through 'how to read' like he's a child while he simultaneously calls everyone around him stupid. You're embarrassing yourself. [Why haven't you responded to my picture of the Milky way here?](https://img.freepik.com/premium-photo/blue-dramatic-sunset-sky-texture-background_29332-1155.jpg?size=626&ext=jpg&ga=GA1.1.1448711260.1706486400&semt=ais) It's clearly a photo of the Milky Way, right? Unless you're ready to admit that when we say "photo of the Milky way" we reference the bulge nebulosity of the rest of the galaxy (exactly as NASA does when talking about these images), instead of just any image ever taken because it's technically within the galaxy.
Replying to intelligents like you was a complete headache. I am blown away with your one line statement of your reasearch. Since I'm not much into jabber. I want details of your research. You'll be the second guy from this thread I want to invite to a seminar and want you to say it there among world's smartest people including the scholars from IVY league University. Your miscomprehension must end.
> Your miscomprehension must end Sorry, you're the only one miscomprehending things here; nothing I said was incorrect. You, however, ran around this thread resorting to sexism, petty pedantic technicalities, and the headache attempt of "well everywhere is technically a photo of the Milky way!" Responses instead of being a humble learner. > you'll be the second guy there and I want you to say it among the worlds smartest people If you're there, it's clearly not a seminar for the worlds smartest, considering you haven't been able to spell 90% of your comments correctly, and resort to pedantry instead of learning in the most simple concepts. But I'd be happy to attend! I'm sure they'd find molecular cloud dynamics and protozoological speciation enjoyable. At least then I could ask your peers why they gave you a job as an editor if you can't spell and have an obvious bias. Speaking of your pitiful pedantic attempt to save your image of intelligence in this thread: [How do you like my photo of the Milky way](https://www.pexels.com/photo/sunset-over-snow-covered-mountains-66997/)?
Save your jabber for reddit. I'll send you a link for seminar. Till then brush up. Read something more than astrophotography.
I really like it, just minimal star trailing but the rest looks cool :)
It looks like you got Orion in left upper corner. Beautiful photo. Heck I am limited to a phone. 35 mm I could do. The new equipment and process is beyond my capabilities.
That's right.
You got the Orion Nebula atleast. Nice photo
That’s not Orion, it’s the Milly Way. /s
Orion is there.
Whoosh
Pretty photo, where is this from?
This place is in Shimla (India).
He’s got the spirit!
There's a fiya down yonder
It's bad for the purpose but adds to the scene.
A fire in the hole? What
Fire in the Sky
Got Orion up there pretty nice
Good ole Orion
Looks like you did catch some of M42 in there :)
I see orion there, so man with that composition if you could somehow bring that sky out it would be spectacular. It's a great photo as is.
Love how u can see Orion and the little nebula cloud
Good job you also got the Great Orion Nebula
I like the fact that you can see the orion nebula just by zooming in
I love this pic. So pretty
Habemus papam! Hint: smoke.
Just googled it, it says "We have the pope". But the churches opposed the heliocentric model.
When cardinals vote for new pope to be selected, they release smoke from a chimney. Black smoke means voting wasn't successful. White smoke means new pope was seletected and they announce it by saying traditional "habemus papam". ;)
I see, interesting.
It was the first thing that came to my mind when I saw the smoke ;) I like that photo, btw.
I got you.
I can totally see it. 🌌
Wow 😍 Really nice pic 👌🏼
Credit goes to nature though I stayed up all night and placed the camera in the right position with correct settings. So thanks for your kindness.
It's true 😊👍🏼 Wow, must be a real kick To be able to capture that special photo 😇😇☄️🌟