If I remember correctly, I think there are accounts that say that for the most part, the stars, when visible, look much more tiny and more point-like in orbit. Also, without the "twinkle" they seem much more still or "silent." Whatever that means. I also read that when on the light side of a planet they are usually not even noticeable because the surface is so bright that the eye adjusts to the extent that the stars disappear. Although just thinking about the eye, you could probably just look away for a spell and start to see them again when all the retinal after images go away.
Well, I don't remember where these things were written, but it's just my vague recollection of astronaut's accounts of their experience. It seems like this is one of the more popular questions for people to ask astronauts.
---------- Post added at 08:00 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:58 AM ----------
Well in fact this is not real. I just saw the sky by a black night, and see how it is. We can see stars, and the milky way, not with her "clouds", but only a lot of stars in it.
So i delet the colours that Martin put in the texture, and i also delet the milky way's clouds (not totally).
I can't say that's 100% realistic, it's only the best result i have done compared to the real sky.
out in the high desert or on the ocean, and knowing what they are, I felt that the dust lanes obscuring the milky way were quite clear, IMO
---------- Post added at 08:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:00 AM ----------
I also imagine that the filters in a space viewing glass probably block quite a bit of light, but i have no real basis for this except that I (perhaps ignorantly) imagine them to be somewhat sunglass-like in function.