Has NASA's MESSENGER gone color blind?

On Jan 20, 11:28 am, Mark Thornton
wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
"Has NASA's MESSENGER gone color blind?"
Apparently "Mercury's unseen side now seen!" is only available in
those colors of gray. After all this time, and of our hard earned
loot spent, I'm actually rather disappointed in NASA's MESSENGER. Are
we ever going to see the full visible spectrum scope and photographic
color depth and contrast worth of our digital images, or merely as
limited as to whatever gray pixels they see fit to share in B&W and of
such limited DR to boot?

The imagers on space probes are usually designed for scientific purposes
and not generating eye candy.

Colour imaging is good science of the best kind.


This usually means a sensor with a colour
filter wheel. Creating colour images requires post processing which
isn't trivial --- with the probe moving you have to align the images for
each colour. The colour response is also often not well suited to
producing what our eyes would interpret as true colour. I think NASA has
admitted that this last aspect results in poor PR and that future
sensors might include more suitable filters in the set.

Note also that sci.op-research is about Operations Research and nothing
to do with optics.

Mark Thornton

Your naysay mindset is noted.

- Brad Guth

On Jan 20, 12:49 pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Mark Thornton wrote:

The imagers on space probes are usually designed for scientific
purposes and not generating eye candy. This usually means a sensor
with a colour filter wheel. Creating colour images requires post
processing which isn't trivial --- with the probe moving you have to
align the images for each colour. The colour response is also often
not well suited to producing what our eyes would interpret as true
colour. I think NASA has admitted that this last aspect results in
poor PR and that future sensors might include more suitable filters in
the set.

In the case of MESSENGER, the photos are across a wide part of the
optical spectrum via several filters.
So they will be putting together color images of the planet from this
data fairly shortly.
The main point of the mission is to determine the elemental make-up of
the surface of Mercury by how the various minerals and rocks reflect
sunlight in various parts of the spectrum, via multiple images of the
same area through all of the optical filters This allows maps to be
generated, such as Clementine generated of the Moon using the same
technique. You can look at the Clementine lunar mineral maps he http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missio...entine/images/


BTW, that Clementine image has the the color pixels excluded from the
moon. Even a 5th grader can prove that image has been doctored.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missio...entine/images/

- Brad Guth

On Jan 20, 10:25 am, "Vincent D. DeSimone"
wrote:
Are
we ever going to see the full visible spectrum scope and photographic
color depth and contrast worth of our digital images, or merely as
limited as to whatever gray pixels they see fit to share in B&W and of
such limited DR to boot?

Yes, we will. As you know, MESSENGER carries the MDIS camera that uses 11
color filters. What we have been seeing are the B&W images of selected
spectrum shots. The magic of combining them into full color images takes
place on the ground. Since weight and cost is very much an issue with these
Discovery missions, the camera was selected to get the most science out, not
just for eye candy. The last of 500 MB of data was only just downloaded; it
will take a little time for the team to combine the shots into full color,
wide-angle panoramas.

That's good news, as I was getting a little worried that we'd waited
too long and having paid far too much for just those B&W images of
such limited DR.

BTW, composite color spectrum imaging is good science, especially
since the color can always be software (aka PhotoShop) excluded by the
individual viewing the archive of any such color enabled image.
Digital color information does not degrade the observationology
science.
- Brad Guth

BradGuth wrote:


So, you are going on record as saying that our moon and Mercury are
each of a medium light gray?



That's certainly wrong for the moon. It is dark gray. I've actually
held a couple of hunks of it in my hands, and seen
many others, and they were all dark gray.

Doug McDonald

In sci.space.history Gary Edstrom wrote:
The pictures from Messenger are for scientific purposes, NOT to wow the
public. To get a color picture would require taking separate shots
through each of 3 color filters. That would require extra time during
this EXTREMELY short duration pass of Mercury.

Then I suppose you will be upset to learn that they used 11 filters:

http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/gallery/...2&image_id=125

"The WAC is equipped with 11 different narrow-band filters, and this
image was taken in filter 7, which is sensitive to light near the red
end of the visible spectrum (750 nm). This view,
also imaged through the remaining 10 WAC filters,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
is from the first set of images taken following MESSENGER's closest
approach with Mercury."

When Messenger settles down into orbit in 2011, they will have more
time to gather full color pictures.

A lot of things can happen in 3 years.

Besides, during its closest approach, it was moving so fast
that the 3 separate pictures required for color would probably not have
aligned perfectly.

It seems to me that it should be relatively easy to correct that in
software (on Earth).

Its time near Mercury was just too valuable to waste
on all those extra pictures who's primary purpose would be for public
consumption.

Remember that the taxes that pay for the mission are paid by the general
public, of which the planetary scientists are a tiny minority.

There is the saying "No Buck Rogers, no bucks", and there should also
be the saying "No pretty pictures, no bucks".

--
http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/

..pt is Portugal| `Whom the gods love die young'-Menander (342-292 BC)
Europe | Villeneuve 50-82, Toivonen 56-86, Senna 60-94

On Jan 21, 6:20 am, Gary Edstrom wrote:
The pictures from Messenger are for scientific purposes, NOT to wow the
public. To get a color picture would require taking separate shots
through each of 3 color filters. That would require extra time during
this EXTREMELY short duration pass of Mercury. When Messenger settles
down into orbit in 2011, they will have more time to gather full color
pictures. Besides, during its closest approach, it was moving so fast
that the 3 separate pictures required for color would probably not have
aligned perfectly. Its time near Mercury was just too valuable to waste
on all those extra pictures who's primary purpose would be for public
consumption.

Gary

Are you you quit through with being anti-science, and otherwise such a
silly born-again rusemaster on behalf of your brown-nosed butt
protecting all that's hocus-pocus NASA.

You know, for some stupid reason your MESSENGER had no problems or
lack of any science whatsoever with all of those full pastel (DR
limited) color images of Earth as it flew past, and there sure as hell
was no shortage of Mercury flyby time for accomplishing a good enough
number of full color and of maximum DR depth worthy images. Three or
four of those full color spectrum images would not have been any loss
to the MESSENGER science, in fact such imaging would only have
improved upon their science.
- Brad Guth

On Jan 21, 11:25 am, Rui Pedro Mendes Salgueiro
wrote:
In sci.space.history Gary Edstrom wrote:

The pictures from Messenger are for scientific purposes, NOT to wow the
public. To get a color picture would require taking separate shots
through each of 3 color filters. That would require extra time during
this EXTREMELY short duration pass of Mercury.

Then I suppose you will be upset to learn that they used 11 filters:
http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/gallery/....php?gallery_i...

The last thing these infowar and disinformation spewing *******s of
NASA's science ****ology ever want to hear is that I'm right. So, you
should expect to get ignored, banished or given a good amount of
whatever lethal flak they can muster.


"The WAC is equipped with 11 different narrow-band filters, and this
image was taken in filter 7, which is sensitive to light near the red
end of the visible spectrum (750 nm). This view,
also imaged through the remaining 10 WAC filters,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
is from the first set of images taken following MESSENGER's closest
approach with Mercury."

When Messenger settles down into orbit in 2011, they will have more
time to gather full color pictures.

A lot of things can happen in 3 years.

Besides, during its closest approach, it was moving so fast
that the 3 separate pictures required for color would probably not have
aligned perfectly.

It seems to me that it should be relatively easy to correct that in
software (on Earth).

Lots of local PhotoShop efforts can manage to correct for most
anything, as long as those original images are in focus and without
too much motion distortion to start off with.

How the freaking hell did they manage to accomplish all of those Earth
flyby color frames so quickly?


Its time near Mercury was just too valuable to waste
on all those extra pictures who's primary purpose would be for public
consumption.

Remember that the taxes that pay for the mission are paid by the general
public, of which the planetary scientists are a tiny minority.

There is the saying "No Buck Rogers, no bucks", and there should also
be the saying "No pretty pictures, no bucks".

--http://www.mat.uc.pt/~rps/

.pt is Portugal| `Whom the gods love die young'-Menander (342-292 BC)
Europe | Villeneuve 50-82, Toivonen 56-86, Senna 60-94

99.9% of Usenet folks seem perfectly cozy with their pretending as
being atheists and otherwise as all-knowing at the same time, are
oddly opposed to sharing the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
They get especially testy whenever such new and improved information
rocks their NASA/Apollo good ship LOLLIPOP, and of most everything
since getting put at risk.
- Brad Guth

On Jan 21, 5:46 am, wrote:
BradGuth wrote:

So, you are going on record as saying that our moon and Mercury are
each of a medium light gray?

That's certainly wrong for the moon. It is dark gray. I've actually
held a couple of hunks of it in my hands, and seen
many others, and they were all dark gray.

Doug McDonald

The nearly coal like albedo of our moon and of the nearly as dark
Mercury are in fact in B&W imaging format of a very dark/charcoal gray
(in fact somewhat new asphalt dark gray looking).

However, don't tell that silly color-blind story along with most any
of those official NASA moon image archives, much less to others having
taken properly filtered images of our moon along with the likes of
those having Venus, Mars, Jupiter or Saturn within the same FOV, thus
having used the very same exposure for their film or CCD obtained
image.
- Brad Guth

Gary Edstrom wrote:
The pictures from Messenger are for scientific purposes, NOT to wow the
public. To get a color picture would require taking separate shots
through each of 3 color filters.

Look... would everyone please get this straight.
They took over 1,200 pictures of the planet on this flyby.
The pictures have all been successfully transmitted to Earth.
They used the color filters on the Wide Angle Camera (WAC) in all of
the pictures it took (the narrow angle camera is B&W).
You can read up on this he
http://www.planetary.org/news/2008/0...pacecraft.html
They got a color movie of the approach to Mercury using three filters of
the Wide Angle Camera to generate a "this is how it would look to the
naked eye" view.
At one hour and twenty-five minutes before closest approach they they
took a color still image of the planet through all eleven filters.
Eleven minutes after closet approach, they took a set of five color
still images through all eleven filters.
(since those images were taken in fairly quick order of the same place
on the surface at different angles, I suspect they are going to be
turned into a 3D color image of that area.)
Then, thirty-six minutes after closest approach, another color mosaic
still view of the whole planet via nine images taken through all eleven
filters.
Finally, at one hour and twelve minutes after closet approach, another
color image of the whole planet in one image taken through all eleven
filters.
To give some idea of what Mercury looks like in color, here's a large
true color shot of it from Mariner 10:
http://www.planetary.org/image/marin...ndhires1f1.jpg
A lot like the Moon, but more light olive drab than gray in color.
You can see what instrument was doing what on MESSENGER during the flyby
via the interactive time-line he
http://messenger.jhuapl.edu/encounte...ime=1200343330
The images released from the WAC up to the moment have been trough the
red filter, as it shows detail best.

Pat

Gary Edstrom wrote:

The pictures from Messenger are for scientific purposes, NOT to wow the
public. To get a color picture would require taking separate shots
through each of 3 color filters. That would require extra time during
this EXTREMELY short duration pass of Mercury. When Messenger settles
down into orbit in 2011, they will have more time to gather full color
pictures. Besides, during its closest approach, it was moving so fast
that the 3 separate pictures required for color would probably not have
aligned perfectly. Its time near Mercury was just too valuable to waste
on all those extra pictures who's primary purpose would be for public
consumption.

So how did the Voyagers get color photos of the moons of Jupiter?
That was over 25 years ago, too.