> The dynamic range difference between day light objects on earth and the stars on the sky is huge.
I agree, but would a person sitting in the satellite see stars if they looked in that direction? If so, do our eyes just have better dynamic range than the camera used by the satellite?
Having said that, if you were sitting on the satellite, you would see even more stars if you blinkered out the brightness of the sun, moon, and earth.
ISO50, 14ev, ISO 12800 8ev. Then read here:
http://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/21579/how-does-the-...
We as humans can probably obtain 24 stops when our body uses all the tricks it has, not only optics of our "hardware".
The fact that the earth in the picture is lit by the sun and has similar luminocity levels to looking at the sky from the surface during the day.
The background of the picture (the stars) on the other hand, have the same meagre light they always have.
The problem is that our monitors have very limited dynamic range - so even if the original had very high dynamic range, it would not show up properly on a current monitor.
There are HDR panels coming to the market this year which have more dynamic range.
And of course it's possible to tonemap HDR images for viewing on normal screens - there are various algorithms for that - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_mapping