On Feb 24, 12:04 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote:
On Feb 23, 10:03 pm, BradGuth wrote:" Don't need
to "read more", because if that's what makes you a happy camper... Do
you teach physics ans science, perhaps 5th grade?. - Brad Guth"
Laughing, that means i just schooled you in the concepts of dynamic
range, human color perception, etc. which exceeded your comprehension
abilities in one sitting and you had to stop reading, but you even
though you have not fully understood how I answered your questions,
you still felt a need to make a stupid comeback post just because you
are in love with your words and you needed to make yourself feel
better with some ego boosting trash, (which means you shouldn't have
bothered to even post)
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/st...4_feature.html
"Mt. Etna Eruption
ISS005-E-19024 --- "Photography in space helped bring out the artistic
side in me," said Commander Leroy Chiao of Expedition 10, who snapped
more than 24,000 photos from space. "The beauty of the Earth was very
inspiring, and I tried to find new ways to capture and express that
beauty." The three-member crew of the Expedition Five mission onboard
the International Space Station was able to observe Mt. Etna's
spectacular eruption, and photograph the details of the eruption plume
and smoke from fires triggered by the lava as it flowed down the
11,000 ft mountain. Image credit: NASA"
Oddly, NASA/Apollo moon was extensively 0.65~0.75 albedo reflective,
because those moon suits were worth an albedo of 0.85, and everything
getting xenon lamp spectrum illuminated to boot, because there's
nothing bluish about our NASA/Apollo unfiltered Kodak moments, and
strangely Venus is never anywhere in sight.
Why are you so unable or unwilling to deal with the truth of
whatever's off-world?
There's so much more to space than mere eye candy. There's actual
science that's easily peer replicated, of photographic science telling
us about the given geology and mineralogy of places and of interesting
things other than Earth.
Obviously, with such impressive eye-candy is why most folks are so
easily mislead to think we're it, the one and only intelligent species
within this universe, and as such we're so often being fooled into
only detecting upon whatever's within the visual spectrum, when our
eyes can't even detect 1% of what a good CCD camera has to offer,
especially if outfitted with mirror optics.
BTW, notice the 12-bit limited hue/color saturation and of having
easily included them pesky stars above Earth, and to notice Earth (3
fold better reflective than Mercury and otherwise half as reflective
as Venus) isn't even the least bit over saturated, is it.
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/...es/aurora.html
Too bad there's not the original 18 MB image files (public owned) to
look at, as those images would be absolutely terrific examples of what
CCD dynamic range has to offer.
I bet you and others of your silly infowar of eye-candy spewing kind
don't even get the basic drift of what this sort of Kodak DCS760
digital camera dynamic range represents. Now try to imagine what a 16-
bit CCD camera w/o optical spectrum limitations would have
accomplished, or even by their existing 12-bit if simply having
allowed for greater FWC saturation (meaning longer exposure and/or of
a lower optical f-stop). In fact, of a unfiltered Kodak film and its
optical DR that's of merely 9-bit is more than good enough for
recording the vibrant likes of Venus along with our moon or Earth
within the exact same FOV(frame of view).
.. - Brad Guth