<p>The position of the moon and the sun in this picture are possible.</p>

<p>It's more feasible in between <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropics" rel="nofollow noreferrer">the tropics</a> and depends on the direction of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon#Inclination" rel="nofollow noreferrer">moon orbit inclination</a>.</p>

<p>The issue in this picture is the homogeneous brightness of the moon.</p>

<p>It's look like a full moon, which happen when the observer (here we will talk about the earth) is between the moon and sun, which is not the case in this picture.</p>

<p>So what the moon should look like ?
In this case the visible part of the moon will be lighted by the sun in a small crescent.
And the rest of the visible part of the moon will be lighted by an almost full earth. That it, a <a href="http://traduction.sensagent.com/earthlight/en-en/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">earthlight</a>.
The brightness contrast is gigantic but you can see it by your eyes.</p>

<p>Here a picture of it:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/VyKon.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/VyKon.jpg" alt="http://blogs.futura-sciences.com/feldmann/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2015/12/cendree2.jpg"></a></p>

<p>And another one with tree to have a brightness reference:</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/lInk7.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/lInk7.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>We can't see such a contrast on the original image. And the picture doesn't look like a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_imaging" rel="nofollow noreferrer">HDR image</a>.</p>

<p>So yes. This is a photomontage.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T13:54:26.763Z
Interesting images. Without having any measurements or reference photos -- my gut feeling is that the moon lit by earth light like in your pictures would be much darker in a picture like the OP's, which has the sun in it. Your second picture, by contrast, has only some afterglow after sunset, which is much darker, so that the moon appears relatively brighter. And still it is fairly pale on your photo and fairly brilliant on the OP's.
Peter - Reinstate Monica
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T14:02:56.880Z
@PeterA.Schneider for the second image we doesn't know how far the sun is still behind the horizon (it's a sunrise picture), the sky color is not a good indicator since the camera sensibility must be huge. The presence of stars and the darkness of the tree show how dark is the night here. About OP picture: the sun and earth-lighted moon at the same time at least need an HDR process.
Orace
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T15:29:20.863Z
What about this picture?http://www.pic98.ir/upload/0ie2_3beceaf75d35232a0813530704380e45.jpg
Ali Ph
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T16:11:11.510Z
@AliPh same thing. An extremely  brilliant small moon crescent should have been visible.
Orace
CC BY-SA 4.0
2017-03-13T13:27:34.047Z
2020-01-28T07:57:26.813Z
2020-01-28T07:57:26.813Z
Orace
<p>No, neither is true. The moon itself does not emit light at optical wavelengths. It only reflects the sunlight, although in rare cases you can see it reflecting light from our earth (in which case the light is also from the sun).  The side being illuminated should face the sun. So, if you see the sun aligned with the moon as in the photo, it must be faked.  But you need the moon and the sun to be in the same line of sight in this case, e.g. a solar/moon eclipse.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T00:06:11.943Z
Is it possible that the camera guy just has [a _really_ good flash](https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/)?
John Dvorak
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T07:20:02.830Z
@JanDvorak Nice theory.  Except the trees are dark ;)
GreenAsJade
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T07:23:20.577Z
I should also comment, indeed, to make such a picture, you probably need two shots: one for the sun and one for moon and then you need Ps to combine those two.
CyTex
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T09:16:07.053Z
@GreenAsJade They are also not on fire. [Mandatory xkcd reference.](https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/)
Peter - Reinstate Monica
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T11:36:03.197Z
@PeterA.Schneider [XKCD "...the trees are on fire"](https://xkcd.com/1603/)
PTwr
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T11:41:32.367Z
@GreenAsJade that's because the the flash is set to a four-second delay like you would need while photographing the moon. The light from the trees is long gone.
John Dvorak
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T12:34:33.180Z
@JanDvorak Good point, but unless something very fundamental changed since yesterday 4 secs delay will not get anything on film either ;-). -- At PTwr: awesome!
Peter - Reinstate Monica
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T12:57:36.150Z
@GreenAsJade Off-camera flash, placed on the other side of the trees.
David Richerby
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-14T21:30:41.770Z
@JanDvorak Although the moon is not 1/4 of the way to the sun, that is still brilliant, and proves that this is in fact a real photo, taken with a really bright correctly timed flash! :)
GreenAsJade
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-15T02:11:31.853Z
@GreenAsJade you do not have enough power to light the flash, even with all the nuclear weapons on earth.
CyTex
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-12T15:14:31.287Z
2017-03-18T09:04:50.130Z
2017-03-18T09:04:50.130Z
CyTex
<p>Yes, these celestial bodies in certain positions can produce this alignment, but the brightness of the moon is the dead give away, besides the fact that the sun couldn't possibly illuminate the side of the moon facing earth from 93 million miles behind it. At least not with this brightness. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-12T03:52:39.537Z
2017-06-12T03:52:39.537Z
Richard Rey Yarber
<p>No, it's not real.  Given that the moon appears to be nearly full, it would be near to the horizon opposite the sun, which is clearly not the case.  Also the framing of the sun and moon between the trees means that the sun and moon are on the same side of the trees, which is not possible when the moon is full.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-12T21:47:02.727Z
It could, however, be a double exposure like @Anthony said above.  So both the sun and the moon could have been in those positions, just 12 or so hours apart.
Cullub
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T13:09:15.907Z
I don't get your argument about 'the same side of the trees'. If taken near equator, this is absolutely possible.
Orace
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T13:30:15.403Z
@Orace For the moon to be full it has to be opposite the sun. If the sun and moon are in line, or nearly so, as in the picture, then the moon would be new as the sun is behind it. So it isn't possible for this picture to be real.
vascowhite
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-12T13:39:55.043Z
2017-03-12T13:39:55.043Z
Dr Chuck
<p>I recently saw this image, but somebody told me that it is fake, possibly photoshopped. The moon and the sun appear to be on the same perpendicular from the horizon. Is there any way to tell if this shot was actually captured?<br>
<a href="https://i.sstatic.net/8Rwu1.jpg" rel="noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/8Rwu1.jpg" alt="Image of the sun near the horizon with the moon above it"></a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-12T18:15:05.453Z
Could be a double exposure taken roughly 12 hrs apart, timed to when the Sun and Moon are each framed by the two trees, but it's just speculation.
Anthony X
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T13:27:58.083Z
Compare https://500px.com/photo/191848311/oak-kisses-by-bess-hamiti?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=5166914 (by Bess Hamiti) and https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/oak-kissing-495053689?src=HzbwfFByVsl5wHR6bgKZkQ-2-39 (by Bess Hamiti). It rather suggests that the creator of this image is no stranger to "shopping".
spender
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-03-13T18:12:42.273Z
This would only be possible if the Moon were very far *behind* the Sun.  And several times larger than it.
RBarryYoung
<the-sun><the-moon>
Can this picture of the moon directly above the sun from the horizon be real?
Ali Ph
# Can this picture of the moon directly above the sun from the horizon be real?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-03-12)

I recently saw this image, but somebody told me that it is fake, possibly photoshopped. The moon and the sun appear to be on the same perpendicular from the horizon. Is there any way to tell if this shot was actually captured?  
[![Image of the sun near the horizon with the moon above it](https://i.sstatic.net/8Rwu1.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/8Rwu1.jpg)

**Tags:** the-sun, the-moon

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Could be a double exposure taken roughly 12 hrs apart, timed to when the Sun and Moon are each framed by the two trees, but it's just speculation.  
> **username_2**: Compare https://500px.com/photo/191848311/oak-kisses-by-bess-hamiti?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=5166914 (by Bess Hamiti) and https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/oak-kissing-495053689?src=HzbwfFByVsl5wHR6bgKZkQ-2-39 (by Bess Hamiti). It rather suggests that the creator of this image is no stranger to "shopping".  
> **username_3**: This would only be possible if the Moon were very far *behind* the Sun.  And several times larger than it.  

---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_12 on 2017-03-12. Score: 33 | Accepted answer

No, it's not real. Given that the moon appears to be nearly full, it would be near to the horizon opposite the sun, which is clearly not the case. Also the framing of the sun and moon between the trees means that the sun and moon are on the same side of the trees, which is not possible when the moon is full.

> **Comments:**
> **username_13**: It could, however, be a double exposure like @Anthony said above.  So both the sun and the moon could have been in those positions, just 12 or so hours apart.  
> **username_4**: I don't get your argument about 'the same side of the trees'. If taken near equator, this is absolutely possible.  
> **username_14**: @username_4 For the moon to be full it has to be opposite the sun. If the sun and moon are in line, or nearly so, as in the picture, then the moon would be new as the sun is behind it. So it isn't possible for this picture to be real.  

---

### Answer by username_6 on 2017-03-12. Score: 11

No, neither is true. The moon itself does not emit light at optical wavelengths. It only reflects the sunlight, although in rare cases you can see it reflecting light from our earth (in which case the light is also from the sun). The side being illuminated should face the sun. So, if you see the sun aligned with the moon as in the photo, it must be faked. But you need the moon and the sun to be in the same line of sight in this case, e.g. a solar/moon eclipse.

> **Comments:**
> **username_7**: Is it possible that the camera guy just has [a _really_ good flash](https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/)?  
> **username_8**: @JanDvorak Nice theory.  Except the trees are dark ;)  
> **username_6**: I should also comment, indeed, to make such a picture, you probably need two shots: one for the sun and one for moon and then you need Ps to combine those two.  
> **username_5**: @username_8 They are also not on fire. [Mandatory xkcd reference.](https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/)  
> **username_9**: @PeterA.Schneider [XKCD "...the trees are on fire"](https://xkcd.com/1603/)  
> **username_7**: @username_8 that's because the the flash is set to a four-second delay like you would need while photographing the moon. The light from the trees is long gone.  
> **username_5**: @JanDvorak Good point, but unless something very fundamental changed since yesterday 4 secs delay will not get anything on film either ;-). -- At username_9: awesome!  
> **username_10**: @username_8 Off-camera flash, placed on the other side of the trees.  
> **username_8**: @JanDvorak Although the moon is not 1/4 of the way to the sun, that is still brilliant, and proves that this is in fact a real photo, taken with a really bright correctly timed flash! :)  
> **username_6**: @username_8 you do not have enough power to light the flash, even with all the nuclear weapons on earth.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2017-03-13. Score: 9

The position of the moon and the sun in this picture are possible.

It's more feasible in between [the tropics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropics) and depends on the direction of the [moon orbit inclination](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon#Inclination).

The issue in this picture is the homogeneous brightness of the moon.

It's look like a full moon, which happen when the observer (here we will talk about the earth) is between the moon and sun, which is not the case in this picture.

So what the moon should look like ?
In this case the visible part of the moon will be lighted by the sun in a small crescent.
And the rest of the visible part of the moon will be lighted by an almost full earth. That it, a [earthlight](http://traduction.sensagent.com/earthlight/en-en/).
The brightness contrast is gigantic but you can see it by your eyes.

Here a picture of it:

[![http://blogs.futura-sciences.com/feldmann/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2015/12/cendree2.jpg](https://i.sstatic.net/VyKon.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/VyKon.jpg)

And another one with tree to have a brightness reference:

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/lInk7.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/lInk7.jpg)

We can't see such a contrast on the original image. And the picture doesn't look like a [HDR image](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-dynamic-range_imaging).

So yes. This is a photomontage.

> **Comments:**
> **username_5**: Interesting images. Without having any measurements or reference photos -- my gut feeling is that the moon lit by earth light like in your pictures would be much darker in a picture like the OP's, which has the sun in it. Your second picture, by contrast, has only some afterglow after sunset, which is much darker, so that the moon appears relatively brighter. And still it is fairly pale on your photo and fairly brilliant on the OP's.  
> **username_4**: @PeterA.Schneider for the second image we doesn't know how far the sun is still behind the horizon (it's a sunrise picture), the sky color is not a good indicator since the camera sensibility must be huge. The presence of stars and the darkness of the tree show how dark is the night here. About OP picture: the sun and earth-lighted moon at the same time at least need an HDR process.  
> **username_0**: What about this picture?http://www.pic98.ir/upload/0ie2_3beceaf75d35232a0813530704380e45.jpg  
> **username_4**: @AliPh same thing. An extremely  brilliant small moon crescent should have been visible.  

---

### Answer by username_11 on 2017-06-12. Score: 0

Yes, these celestial bodies in certain positions can produce this alignment, but the brightness of the moon is the dead give away, besides the fact that the sun couldn't possibly illuminate the side of the moon facing earth from 93 million miles behind it. At least not with this brightness.


---

