Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Chemistry professors never die, they just fail to react.

tech / sci.astro.amateur / Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great

SubjectAuthor
* Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so greatpalsing
`* Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so greatpalsing
 `* Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so greatpalsing
  `- Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so greatkellehe...@gmail.com

1
Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great

<3101c8a5-a33b-42df-8d7e-808752877d21n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=8636&group=sci.astro.amateur#8636

  copy link   Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:58b:b0:31f:407e:9e43 with SMTP id c11-20020a05622a058b00b0031f407e9e43mr21913494qtb.258.1660094914508;
Tue, 09 Aug 2022 18:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:db94:0:b0:676:d3bf:7cbd with SMTP id
g142-20020a25db94000000b00676d3bf7cbdmr22346528ybf.590.1660094914205; Tue, 09
Aug 2022 18:28:34 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 18:28:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <6c0316ec-461e-48ad-8241-77f81e4a31can@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:1700:9c80:b020:ad1f:db61:3085:ceeb;
posting-account=FyvUbwkAAAARAfp2CSw2Km63SBNL9trz
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1700:9c80:b020:ad1f:db61:3085:ceeb
References: <6c0316ec-461e-48ad-8241-77f81e4a31can@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3101c8a5-a33b-42df-8d7e-808752877d21n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great
From: pnals...@gmail.com (palsing)
Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 01:28:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 1865
 by: palsing - Wed, 10 Aug 2022 01:28 UTC

On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:16:05 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> I've seen some amazing planetary images, shots from 10-20 inch scopes that vastly eclipse what professional observatories did years ago. What I don't quite get though are the highly overprocessed images. The images are manipulated to the point of clear emergence of artifacts. Surface of Jupiter's clouds looks more like the curdled milk of the inner Orion nebula at high power. What I'm wondering is if the processors can see this and do the realize it isn't detail on the planet?

Can you supply an example of what you are talking about?

Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great

<aeb0bb59-7e00-4e03-acd6-8c1f0c837eebn@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=8672&group=sci.astro.amateur#8672

  copy link   Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5ccf:0:b0:474:7201:6789 with SMTP id iu15-20020ad45ccf000000b0047472016789mr8769609qvb.75.1660436949212;
Sat, 13 Aug 2022 17:29:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:c657:0:b0:671:6b14:9d7e with SMTP id
k84-20020a25c657000000b006716b149d7emr7936232ybf.35.1660436948980; Sat, 13
Aug 2022 17:29:08 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 17:29:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9fa543c9-601c-4464-af74-1ba864573310n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:1700:9c80:b020:bc76:9893:44cf:9083;
posting-account=FyvUbwkAAAARAfp2CSw2Km63SBNL9trz
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1700:9c80:b020:bc76:9893:44cf:9083
References: <6c0316ec-461e-48ad-8241-77f81e4a31can@googlegroups.com>
<3101c8a5-a33b-42df-8d7e-808752877d21n@googlegroups.com> <9fa543c9-601c-4464-af74-1ba864573310n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <aeb0bb59-7e00-4e03-acd6-8c1f0c837eebn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great
From: pnals...@gmail.com (palsing)
Injection-Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 00:29:09 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2520
 by: palsing - Sun, 14 Aug 2022 00:29 UTC

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 4:38:23 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 August 2022 at 21:28:35 UTC-4, palsing wrote:
> > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:16:05 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> > > I've seen some amazing planetary images, shots from 10-20 inch scopes that vastly eclipse what professional observatories did years ago. What I don't quite get though are the highly overprocessed images. The images are manipulated to the point of clear emergence of artifacts. Surface of Jupiter's clouds looks more like the curdled milk of the inner Orion nebula at high power. What I'm wondering is if the processors can see this and do the realize it isn't detail on the planet?

> > Can you supply an example of what you are talking about?

> Good example of a well-detailed picture with artifacts.
>
> https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/836495-saturn-and-jupiter-in-good-seeing-1482022/

So, do you claim that there are details on this photo that do not actually exist? Hoe]=w about this one...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D5BbpcKWkAAYk7V?format=jpg&name=medium

.... do you see fabricated details here, too?

Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great

<098dba8c-1c8d-4ba2-8e09-a27b7e7ef1efn@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=8673&group=sci.astro.amateur#8673

  copy link   Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4eec:0:b0:476:b2b2:1809 with SMTP id dv12-20020ad44eec000000b00476b2b21809mr9346988qvb.40.1660457640065;
Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:14:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:2d5d:0:b0:685:1c21:3ee8 with SMTP id
s29-20020a252d5d000000b006851c213ee8mr4682084ybe.197.1660457639564; Sat, 13
Aug 2022 23:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 23:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <aeb0bb59-7e00-4e03-acd6-8c1f0c837eebn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2600:1700:9c80:b020:bc76:9893:44cf:9083;
posting-account=FyvUbwkAAAARAfp2CSw2Km63SBNL9trz
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2600:1700:9c80:b020:bc76:9893:44cf:9083
References: <6c0316ec-461e-48ad-8241-77f81e4a31can@googlegroups.com>
<3101c8a5-a33b-42df-8d7e-808752877d21n@googlegroups.com> <9fa543c9-601c-4464-af74-1ba864573310n@googlegroups.com>
<aeb0bb59-7e00-4e03-acd6-8c1f0c837eebn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <098dba8c-1c8d-4ba2-8e09-a27b7e7ef1efn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great
From: pnals...@gmail.com (palsing)
Injection-Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 06:14:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 3156
 by: palsing - Sun, 14 Aug 2022 06:13 UTC

On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 5:29:10 PM UTC-7, palsing wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 4:38:23 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 9 August 2022 at 21:28:35 UTC-4, palsing wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:16:05 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> > > > I've seen some amazing planetary images, shots from 10-20 inch scopes that vastly eclipse what professional observatories did years ago. What I don't quite get though are the highly overprocessed images. The images are manipulated to the point of clear emergence of artifacts. Surface of Jupiter's clouds looks more like the curdled milk of the inner Orion nebula at high power. What I'm wondering is if the processors can see this and do the realize it isn't detail on the planet?
>
> > > Can you supply an example of what you are talking about?
>
> > Good example of a well-detailed picture with artifacts.
> >
> > https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/836495-saturn-and-jupiter-in-good-seeing-1482022/
> So, do you claim that there are details on this photo that do not actually exist? Hoe]=w about this one...
>
> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D5BbpcKWkAAYk7V?format=jpg&name=medium
>
> ... do you see fabricated details here, too?

How about this one?

https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/298505683_611091627239200_7836364199163042304_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=4D-dVTps4NYAX95oFl_&_nc_oc=AQmUizcSKRcVZHAC1LZ_TGUlVprnAyySz0hlYgO7N3Nsi0FunUJT18NvAUeUCyIeWhoOZ0frhIFYRarjsHeSqRj1&tn=yHv5RMUkaW-96FPk&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-2.xx&oh=00_AT8Iw6txj4SELcCMxJe_ms1SMy45gcHMpX-AaEAZRrPdzw&oe=62FD9851

Any flaws detected here?

Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great

<3cf9e381-429a-40ae-818c-d6843d20ac69n@googlegroups.com>

  copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=8674&group=sci.astro.amateur#8674

  copy link   Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4502:b0:6b4:6c2f:e7b7 with SMTP id t2-20020a05620a450200b006b46c2fe7b7mr7851307qkp.11.1660462980651;
Sun, 14 Aug 2022 00:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a25:4d0b:0:b0:67c:2104:fc7f with SMTP id
a11-20020a254d0b000000b0067c2104fc7fmr8217393ybb.480.1660462980373; Sun, 14
Aug 2022 00:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.astro.amateur
Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 00:43:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <098dba8c-1c8d-4ba2-8e09-a27b7e7ef1efn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=213.202.157.245; posting-account=I3BSGAoAAADBa0hVQRltLB3YrdNlBH-l
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.202.157.245
References: <6c0316ec-461e-48ad-8241-77f81e4a31can@googlegroups.com>
<3101c8a5-a33b-42df-8d7e-808752877d21n@googlegroups.com> <9fa543c9-601c-4464-af74-1ba864573310n@googlegroups.com>
<aeb0bb59-7e00-4e03-acd6-8c1f0c837eebn@googlegroups.com> <098dba8c-1c8d-4ba2-8e09-a27b7e7ef1efn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <3cf9e381-429a-40ae-818c-d6843d20ac69n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Planetary imaging. Some great some not so great
From: kelleher...@gmail.com (kellehe...@gmail.com)
Injection-Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 07:43:00 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 3330
 by: kellehe...@gmail.com - Sun, 14 Aug 2022 07:43 UTC

On Sunday, August 14, 2022 at 7:14:01 AM UTC+1, palsing wrote:
> On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 5:29:10 PM UTC-7, palsing wrote:
> > On Saturday, August 13, 2022 at 4:38:23 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, 9 August 2022 at 21:28:35 UTC-4, palsing wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, August 9, 2022 at 5:16:05 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:
> > > > > I've seen some amazing planetary images, shots from 10-20 inch scopes that vastly eclipse what professional observatories did years ago. What I don't quite get though are the highly overprocessed images. The images are manipulated to the point of clear emergence of artifacts. Surface of Jupiter's clouds looks more like the curdled milk of the inner Orion nebula at high power. What I'm wondering is if the processors can see this and do the realize it isn't detail on the planet?
> >
> > > > Can you supply an example of what you are talking about?
> >
> > > Good example of a well-detailed picture with artifacts.
> > >
> > > https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/836495-saturn-and-jupiter-in-good-seeing-1482022/
> > So, do you claim that there are details on this photo that do not actually exist? Hoe]=w about this one...
> >
> > https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D5BbpcKWkAAYk7V?format=jpg&name=medium
> >
> > ... do you see fabricated details here, too?
> How about this one?
>
> https://scontent-lax3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/298505683_611091627239200_7836364199163042304_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=4D-dVTps4NYAX95oFl_&_nc_oc=AQmUizcSKRcVZHAC1LZ_TGUlVprnAyySz0hlYgO7N3Nsi0FunUJT18NvAUeUCyIeWhoOZ0frhIFYRarjsHeSqRj1&tn=yHv5RMUkaW-96FPk&_nc_ht=scontent-lax3-2.xx&oh=00_AT8Iw6txj4SELcCMxJe_ms1SMy45gcHMpX-AaEAZRrPdzw&oe=62FD9851
>
> Any flaws detected here?

Gorgeous image.

1
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.8
clearnet tor