|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 22, 8:52 pm, BradGuth wrote:" Another
interesting second or third hand rant, even though you are intent upon playing word games, rather than offering us science that can be peer replicated as to what I had previously specified." laughing your quoting numbers like "spec. candy", as if you really understood what the numbers mean, much less that the ccd is but one component of the digital imaging system. Ok lets try it this way humans are either going to view the image in the print form or on a monitor, both of which have their own dynamic ranges from black (min), to a white (max), that is independent of the ccd's dynamic range. Now venturing into the area of human color perception is necessary if someone wants to reproduce what the human "sees", as the sequence goes from humans capturing the image, image processing and finally viewing of the image on paper or on a monitor. Now even if you take humans out of the image capture part of the equation, you still have to have the image processing for viewing, meaning the ccd's capabilities are just part of the system, just like the silver halide crystals on film are but one part of the sequence that reproduces what the "eye sees". So I think its funny that you seem to be stuck on comparing a devices capabilities against the human visual system without understanding the latter So actually I did answer your question, you just did not understand the answer, nor how it directly relates to your constant ranting about dynamic range, that is why you go from regurgitating numbers of a chips specifications, to questioning the results of the image, when you really don't know what is going on in the optics of the device or the human visual system. The human visual system specifically analyzes and compares the colors of the electromagnetic spectrum with photo pigment responses (short medium and long cones, with contributions from the rods) spanning a range of about 1.3 electron volts of energy covering from reds to blues, and through primary and secondary comparisons our brain perceives what Newton termed extra-spectral hues, completing a connection of low energy reds to the high energy blues. The concept of human color perception is not just describing eye candy, as the red/ green and yellow/blue opposition responses in the human eye are what make up the cie Lab color space axis where ALL the data from the ccd image is mapped. Cie lab space is a 3d Cartesian plane based on the results of experiments that studied how the human visual system responds to stimuli. Luminosity is represented on the z axis going from absolute black to white (0 to 100), with red/green yellow/blue opponency represented on the x, y axis +/-100 in either direction: the x axis is lower case a, going from greenish (-a), toward being reddish (+a) (red vs. green), the y axis is the lower case b and goes from bluish (-b) towards yellowish (+b) yellow vs. blue. Now given all the data captured by any ccd has to be mapped to this coordinate system, and given the fact that same system is based on the human visual system you need to learn a lot more because cielab space itself does not contain all of the colors the human eye can detect, i.e. its missing some greens and extra spectral hues (see lab gamut display brucelindbloom.com) The Most expensive professional digital cameras on the market do not allow the image to be mapped to custom color spaces or color profiles but instead utilize srgb, or adobergb, which does not encompass all the volume of the cielab space, resulting in an even smaller range of colors than what the human "eye sees". (On a side note possibly the reason for colormatch being the profile for the messenger mercury probe images, is simply because even though colormatch color space is small, no data is lost in image transfers after the image has been mapped to that particular color space) . The capacity of a ccd can be reduced to specific wavelength ranges by manner of filter wheels, or template overlaying on the ccd, but you are still counting photons in bins, which as I previously stated is different from how human color perception is achieved through relative comparisons of photo pigment responses (CIE 1931 XYZ color matching functions see nasa ames color research lab), and comparisons of those comparisons. One of the unique aspects of the human visual system is that it attempts to preserve an objects color even in lighting conditions that change from approx 10,000 Kelvin's (midday bluish), to about 2700 Kelvin's (sunset and sunrise reddish). The illuminant whether it is natural or artificial will have a spectral power distribution that can be represented by a tristimulus value, which will be the "white" in our field of view. The tristimulus of the illuminant can be represented in chromacity diagrams, showing the white point of that illuminant, 5000 Kelvin's = d50, and 6500 Kelvin's = d65, indicating the warmness or coolness of the particular white. Now the white point of the color space that the ccd image is mapped to is set by the color profile itself (see brucelindbloom.com for profiles and info), and therefore even though digital imaging devices allow the user to set the color temp, and white balance, is still is using discrete settings, which will then be mapped based on the color spaces white point, which is much different from how the human eye adapts to changing light conditions. An image captured on film or on ccd, is metered so the energy received over a period of time does not overexpose the best detail in the desired subject, which is accomplished by adjusting the exposure time or the lens iris diameter (f/stop), based on the films speed or equivalent digital settings. No imaging system is perfect, as optically there are trade offs, smaller lens iris diameters yields larger depth of field, but less resolution and longer exposure times, while larger lens iris diameter settings yield faster exposure times and high resolutions due to the greater amount of light being received, but at the expense of the images depth of field. All of these components whether they be manually set, or auto metered, determine what objects will be the shadows, highlights, and mid tone ranges of the image, (meaning those variables set the "blackest black" minimum luminosity or "whitest white" maximum luminosity in the image. Therefore an images range from maximum to minimum luminosity is not a function of the ccd or films range alone, but the amount of light received from the objects being viewed based on a number of variables (lens, f/stop, film speed/ccd specs, exposure time, desired zones, developing times for film, and print/image manipulation. Please see "zone system", and you will find that any image is a balance of capturing the subject's details in zone V, while at the same time not blowing out the details of the shadows zones III,II and highlights zones VII,VIII which is much different than the specs of the film or ccd (see luminous-landscape.com below for the simplified zone system description). Ok now, the whitest or most luminous object will be mapped as the highest point on the cielab z axis for that image, (with the slight biases introduced from the tristumulus value), the black or least luminous object will be the lowest point on the z axis with some biases, where the dynamic range is the difference of luminosities, minimum to maximum, and the logarithmic relationship from one to the other is the gamma (the connecting grey values in between). Printer's dynamic ranges are determined by the ink/media relationship or how much ink can be placed on the media usually making a CMY black, without running bleeding or buckling. A specific profile for printing is not just unique to that device, but is unique to that paper and ink set as well and requires setting the ink limits (described above) and is then followed by the careful balancing the colors and grays, that make the full color range or palette the printer can produce, meaning the images produced from a printer have a dynamic range that is a function of the inks and paper, and not the ccd. A monitors dynamic range is determined by the quality of the blackness of the screen, as compared to the best balanced and whitest white that can be achieved from the phosphor emissions, but the problem is a monitors phosphors change over time, meaning that the dynamic range is, dynamic, no pun intended, but that's the problem with monitors and keeping them calibrated. An images dynamic range on film can be determined by measuring the differences in the film densities in the most dense region (least luminous) setting the minimum, compared to the least dense (most luminous) setting the luminosity maximum, on a densitometer, which will show the final dynamic range is much less than the film is capable of producing, and was not just determined by the films range, but by the specifics that adjusted the exposure setting to the lighting conditions when the image was taken. Which once again shows that the human perception and color constancy are pretty unique attributes of human adaptation when were are compared to a device like a ccd or material like film. Now the greater amount of bits, the more information, but that information does not increase the dynamic range, it only parses the grey scale in between the minimum and maximum into finer sections, resulting in slight differences in the shadows, and mid-tones especially, but the same cielab space is utilized with the same limitations, the differences between 8 an 16 bit images are the 16 bit data is just parsed a little better resulting in smoother transitions, meaning 16 bit images aint all that you make them out to be. So therefore analyzing colors (or what you want to imply is missing) from an image strictly based on the ccd's or films specifications alone is not logical, and will yield incorrect results because that analysis does not the completely take into account system involved with producing the image. So brad, yes ccd's have great capabilities, but humans capturing the image can describe the object with words in such a way that compliments what the ccd produces, as humans are part of the viewing end of the equation, so therefore they should be on the image capturing end to better qualify the observed phenomena. Therefore once again it is human nature to creatively/subjectively describe events and sights (an observed events colors) with words that present a feeling to the reader that is far beyond the characters composing the text, and that is why humans must be part of space travel... Color Research Lab NASA Ames Research Center http://colorusage.arc.nasa.gov/lum_and_chrom.php Rochester Institute of Technolgy Munsell Color Institute http://www.cis.rit.edu/mcsl/ Information on color spaces, color conversions, etc. Bruce Lindbloom's website http://www.brucelindbloom.com/ Simplified Zone System http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...e_system.shtml Exposure value calculations The Science of Photography http://johnlind.tripod.com/science/scienceexposure.html |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
My goodness, aren't we chuck full of damage-control infomercial
crapolla, of such fancy mainstream words upon words and eye-candy hype, yet oddly sill managing to not address what I'm after. Once again, you've intentionally excluded the focus or intent of what truth there is to behold, about CCD camera DR and of FWC saturation that isn't getting utilized because it would show off too much of the cold hard truths about items other than Earth that'll unavoidably show up in those images (unless artificially removed by those in charge of snookering and dumbfounding humanity for all it's worth, and then some). Pictures from space via ISS, of somewhat old images of Earth by way of their Kodak DCS760 camera with its 12-bit limited DR(dynamic range), 3032 x 2008 pixels and sensor format area of 27.65mm x 18.43mm = 9+ micron pixels. http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/...es/aurora.html Auroras Dancing in the Night 02.12.04 Aboard the International Space Station, Expedition 6 Science Officer Don Pettit offers a unique perspective on auroras. Seems perfectly good enough eye-candy, whereas truly scientific CCD cameras of the same era with nearly that size of pixel and of 16-bit DR should have been the norm for anything of ISS associated with their EVC or instead of the DCS760, even if having to be of monochrome and using 3 or 4 specific color spectrum filters for creating the composite colour renditions would be a whole lot better science, although full colour CCD renditions from IR to UV at 16 bit DR can't be all that insurmountable, especially of larger format CCDs having starlight sensitivity and fast enough frame scans for low noise video capture applications, as otherwise with commercial video equipment if need be you can always incorporate three or even four individual CCDs per color video camera. Obviously our MESSENGER mission of using CCDs and mirror optics is yet another prime and spendy example of what not to do, because their scientific composite color images were absolutely pathetic, and they could have used another 10X in their telephoto capability. Also remember, as similar results with over-saturating film, except saturated CCD pixels offer vastly superior spectrum bandwidth that can also have their FWC(full well capacity) exceeded without harm, allowing those other less saturated pixels available to better record whatever's dim or of far +/- spectrum items with much greater ease than film because those CCDs exceed in DR as well as in their scope of IR/UV spectrum detection. 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. BTW, notice the 12-bit limited hue/color saturation and of having easily including them pesky stars above Earth, and to notice Earth 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 to look at, as those images would be absolutely terrific. I bet you and others of your silly infowar of eye-candy spewing kind don't even get the 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 accomplish, 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). .. - Brad Guth columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote: On Feb 22, 8:52 pm, BradGuth wrote:" Another interesting second or third hand rant, even though you are intent upon playing word games, rather than offering us science that can be peer replicated as to what I had previously specified." laughing your quoting numbers like "spec. candy", as if you really understood what the numbers mean, much less that the ccd is but one component of the digital imaging system. Ok lets try it this way humans are either going to view the image in the print form or on a monitor, both of which have their own dynamic ranges from black (min), to a white (max), that is independent of the ccd's dynamic range. Now venturing into the area of human color perception is necessary if someone wants to reproduce what the human "sees", as the sequence goes from humans capturing the image, image processing and finally viewing of the image on paper or on a monitor. Now even if you take humans out of the image capture part of the equation, you still have to have the image processing for viewing, meaning the ccd's capabilities are just part of the system, just like the silver halide crystals on film are but one part of the sequence that reproduces what the "eye sees". So I think its funny that you seem to be stuck on comparing a devices capabilities against the human visual system without understanding the latter So actually I did answer your question, you just did not understand the answer, nor how it directly relates to your constant ranting about dynamic range, that is why you go from regurgitating numbers of a chips specifications, to questioning the results of the image, when you really don't know what is going on in the optics of the device or the human visual system. The human visual system specifically analyzes and compares the colors of the electromagnetic spectrum with photo pigment responses (short medium and long cones, with contributions from the rods) spanning a range of about 1.3 electron volts of energy covering from reds to blues, and through primary and secondary comparisons our brain perceives what Newton termed extra-spectral hues, completing a connection of low energy reds to the high energy blues. The concept of human color perception is not just describing eye candy, as the red/ green and yellow/blue opposition responses in the human eye are what make up the cie Lab color space axis where ALL the data from the ccd image is mapped. Cie lab space is a 3d Cartesian plane based on the results of experiments that studied how the human visual system responds to stimuli. Luminosity is represented on the z axis going from absolute black to white (0 to 100), with red/green yellow/blue opponency represented on the x, y axis +/-100 in either direction: the x axis is lower case a, going from greenish (-a), toward being reddish (+a) (red vs. green), the y axis is the lower case b and goes from bluish (-b) towards yellowish (+b) yellow vs. blue. Now given all the data captured by any ccd has to be mapped to this coordinate system, and given the fact that same system is based on the human visual system you need to learn a lot more because cielab space itself does not contain all of the colors the human eye can detect, i.e. its missing some greens and extra spectral hues (see lab gamut display brucelindbloom.com) The Most expensive professional digital cameras on the market do not allow the image to be mapped to custom color spaces or color profiles but instead utilize srgb, or adobergb, which does not encompass all the volume of the cielab space, resulting in an even smaller range of colors than what the human "eye sees". (On a side note possibly the reason for colormatch being the profile for the messenger mercury probe images, is simply because even though colormatch color space is small, no data is lost in image transfers after the image has been mapped to that particular color space) . The capacity of a ccd can be reduced to specific wavelength ranges by manner of filter wheels, or template overlaying on the ccd, but you are still counting photons in bins, which as I previously stated is different from how human color perception is achieved through relative comparisons of photo pigment responses (CIE 1931 XYZ color matching functions see nasa ames color research lab), and comparisons of those comparisons. One of the unique aspects of the human visual system is that it attempts to preserve an objects color even in lighting conditions that change from approx 10,000 Kelvin's (midday bluish), to about 2700 Kelvin's (sunset and sunrise reddish). The illuminant whether it is natural or artificial will have a spectral power distribution that can be represented by a tristimulus value, which will be the "white" in our field of view. The tristimulus of the illuminant can be represented in chromacity diagrams, showing the white point of that illuminant, 5000 Kelvin's = d50, and 6500 Kelvin's = d65, indicating the warmness or coolness of the particular white. Now the white point of the color space that the ccd image is mapped to is set by the color profile itself (see brucelindbloom.com for profiles and info), and therefore even though digital imaging devices allow the user to set the color temp, and white balance, is still is using discrete settings, which will then be mapped based on the color spaces white point, which is much different from how the human eye adapts to changing light conditions. An image captured on film or on ccd, is metered so the energy received over a period of time does not overexpose the best detail in the desired subject, which is accomplished by adjusting the exposure time or the lens iris diameter (f/stop), based on the films speed or equivalent digital settings. No imaging system is perfect, as optically there are trade offs, smaller lens iris diameters yields larger depth of field, but less resolution and longer exposure times, while larger lens iris diameter settings yield faster exposure times and high resolutions due to the greater amount of light being received, but at the expense of the images depth of field. All of these components whether they be manually set, or auto metered, determine what objects will be the shadows, highlights, and mid tone ranges of the image, (meaning those variables set the "blackest black" minimum luminosity or "whitest white" maximum luminosity in the image. Therefore an images range from maximum to minimum luminosity is not a function of the ccd or films range alone, but the amount of light received from the objects being viewed based on a number of variables (lens, f/stop, film speed/ccd specs, exposure time, desired zones, developing times for film, and print/image manipulation. Please see "zone system", and you will find that any image is a balance of capturing the subject's details in zone V, while at the same time not blowing out the details of the shadows zones III,II and highlights zones VII,VIII which is much different than the specs of the film or ccd (see luminous-landscape.com below for the simplified zone system description). Ok now, the whitest or most luminous object will be mapped as the highest point on the cielab z axis for that image, (with the slight biases introduced from the tristumulus value), the black or least luminous object will be the lowest point on the z axis with some biases, where the dynamic range is the difference of luminosities, minimum to maximum, and the logarithmic relationship from one to the other is the gamma (the connecting grey values in between). Printer's dynamic ranges are determined by the ink/media relationship or how much ink can be placed on the media usually making a CMY black, without running bleeding or buckling. A specific profile for printing is not just unique to that device, but is unique to that paper and ink set as well and requires setting the ink limits (described above) and is then followed by the careful balancing the colors and grays, that make the full color range or palette the printer can produce, meaning the images produced from a printer have a dynamic range that is a function of the inks and paper, and not the ccd. A monitors dynamic range is determined by the quality of the blackness of the screen, as compared to the best balanced and whitest white that can be achieved from the phosphor emissions, but the problem is a monitors phosphors change over time, meaning that the dynamic range is, dynamic, no pun intended, but that's the problem with monitors and keeping them calibrated. An images dynamic range on film can be determined by measuring the differences in the film densities in the most dense region (least luminous) setting the minimum, compared to the least dense (most luminous) setting the luminosity maximum, on a densitometer, which will show the final dynamic range is much less than the film is capable of producing, and was not just determined by the films range, but by the specifics that adjusted the exposure setting to the lighting conditions when the image was taken. Which once again shows that the human perception and color constancy are pretty unique attributes of human adaptation when were are compared to a device like a ccd or material like film. Now the greater amount of bits, the more information, but that information does not increase the dynamic range, it only parses the grey scale in between the minimum and maximum into finer sections, resulting in slight differences in the shadows, and mid-tones especially, but the same cielab space is utilized with the same limitations, the differences between 8 an 16 bit images are the 16 bit data is just parsed a little better resulting in smoother transitions, meaning 16 bit images aint all that you make them out to be. So therefore analyzing colors (or what you want to imply is missing) from an image strictly based on the ccd's or films specifications alone is not logical, and will yield incorrect results because that analysis does not the completely take into account system involved with producing the image. So brad, yes ccd's have great capabilities, but humans capturing the image can describe the object with words in such a way that compliments what the ccd produces, as humans are part of the viewing end of the equation, so therefore they should be on the image capturing end to better qualify the observed phenomena. Therefore once again it is human nature to creatively/subjectively describe events and sights (an observed events colors) with words that present a feeling to the reader that is far beyond the characters composing the text, and that is why humans must be part of space travel... Color Research Lab NASA Ames Research Center http://colorusage.arc.nasa.gov/lum_and_chrom.php Rochester Institute of Technolgy Munsell Color Institute http://www.cis.rit.edu/mcsl/ Information on color spaces, color conversions, etc. Bruce Lindbloom's website http://www.brucelindbloom.com/ Simplified Zone System http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...e_system.shtml Exposure value calculations The Science of Photography http://johnlind.tripod.com/science/scienceexposure.html |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 23, 4:59 pm, BradGuth wrote:"My goodness,
aren't we chuck full of damage-control infomercial" but In a previous thread brad stated the following "Thanks to our "no kid left behind" policy, as of prior to CCD camera imaging perhaps all of 0.1% of Americans even understood what photographic spectrum sensitivity and the associated DR(dynamic range) of B&W or color film even meant. Since the advent of commercial/ consumer CCD cameras and the continued dumbing down of America, I'd say that fewer than 0.0001% (that's one out of a million)" http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...4b4bd03e8c55aa And he also stated the following "If any of this PhotoShop or whatever digital photographic software usage is simply too much for your eye-candy speed or naysay mindset, then perhaps you should not even be posting anywhere within Usenet science, or contributing into most any other public space/astronomy or astrophysics related forums, especially since so many of you folks seem to lack the most basic of digital image observationology skills." http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...9f67ca6b5be403 Well I just demonstrated to you dynamic range, human color perception, along with ciecolor space, with citations showing the science backing my words, and you cannot handle that fact! So im laughing at you brad, because that means you did not take the time to understand or comprehend the information i presented, which at this point means you don't even have any intention of expanding beyond your "spec candy" descriptions, and therefore you have no place to criticize anybody's observational skills, or their understanding of ccd imaging as I have shown you have a lot to learn, and maybe you should take your own advice and "not even be posting anywhere within Usenet science"... laughing your quoting numbers like "spec. candy", as if you really understood what the numbers mean, much less that the ccd is but one component of the digital imaging system. Ok lets try it this way humans are either going to view the image in the print form or on a monitor, both of which have their own dynamic ranges from black (min), to a white (max), that is independent of the ccd's dynamic range. Now venturing into the area of human color perception is necessary if someone wants to reproduce what the human "sees", as the sequence goes from humans capturing the image, image processing and finally viewing of the image on paper or on a monitor. Now even if you take humans out of the image capture part of the equation, you still have to have the image processing for viewing, meaning the ccd's capabilities are just part of the system, just like the silver halide crystals on film are but one part of the sequence that reproduces what the "eye sees". So I think its funny that you seem to be stuck on comparing a devices capabilities against the human visual system without understanding the latter So actually I did answer your question, you just did not understand the answer, nor how it directly relates to your constant ranting about dynamic range, that is why you go from regurgitating numbers of a chips specifications, to questioning the results of the image, when you really don't know what is going on in the optics of the device or the human visual system. The human visual system specifically analyzes and compares the colors of the electromagnetic spectrum with photo pigment responses (short medium and long cones, with contributions from the rods) spanning a range of about 1.3 electron volts of energy covering from reds to blues, and through primary and secondary comparisons our brain perceives what Newton termed extra-spectral hues, completing a connection of low energy reds to the high energy blues. The concept of human color perception is not just describing eye candy, as the red/ green and yellow/blue opposition responses in the human eye are what make up the cie Lab color space axis where ALL the data from the ccd image is mapped. Cie lab space is a 3d Cartesian plane based on the results of experiments that studied how the human visual system responds to stimuli. Luminosity is represented on the z axis going from absolute black to white (0 to 100), with red/green yellow/blue opponency represented on the x, y axis +/-100 in either direction: the x axis is lower case a, going from greenish (-a), toward being reddish (+a) (red vs. green), the y axis is the lower case b and goes from bluish (-b) towards yellowish (+b) yellow vs. blue. Now given all the data captured by any ccd has to be mapped to this coordinate system, and given the fact that same system is based on the human visual system you need to learn a lot more because cielab space itself does not contain all of the colors the human eye can detect, i.e. its missing some greens and extra spectral hues (see lab gamut display brucelindbloom.com) The Most expensive professional digital cameras on the market do not allow the image to be mapped to custom color spaces or color profiles but instead utilize srgb, or adobergb, which does not encompass all the volume of the cielab space, resulting in an even smaller range of colors than what the human "eye sees". (On a side note possibly the reason for colormatch being the profile for the messenger mercury probe images, is simply because even though colormatch color space is small, no data is lost in image transfers after the image has been mapped to that particular color space) . The capacity of a ccd can be reduced to specific wavelength ranges by manner of filter wheels, or template overlaying on the ccd, but you are still counting photons in bins, which as I previously stated is different from how human color perception is achieved through relative comparisons of photo pigment responses (CIE 1931 XYZ color matching functions see nasa ames color research lab), and comparisons of those comparisons. One of the unique aspects of the human visual system is that it attempts to preserve an objects color even in lighting conditions that change from approx 10,000 Kelvin's (midday bluish), to about 2700 Kelvin's (sunset and sunrise reddish). The illuminant whether it is natural or artificial will have a spectral power distribution that can be represented by a tristimulus value, which will be the "white" in our field of view. The tristimulus of the illuminant can be represented in chromacity diagrams, showing the white point of that illuminant, 5000 Kelvin's = d50, and 6500 Kelvin's = d65, indicating the warmness or coolness of the particular white. Now the white point of the color space that the ccd image is mapped to is set by the color profile itself (see brucelindbloom.com for profiles and info), and therefore even though digital imaging devices allow the user to set the color temp, and white balance, is still is using discrete settings, which will then be mapped based on the color spaces white point, which is much different from how the human eye adapts to changing light conditions. An image captured on film or on ccd, is metered so the energy received over a period of time does not overexpose the best detail in the desired subject, which is accomplished by adjusting the exposure time or the lens iris diameter (f/stop), based on the films speed or equivalent digital settings. No imaging system is perfect, as optically there are trade offs, smaller lens iris diameters yields larger depth of field, but less resolution and longer exposure times, while larger lens iris diameter settings yield faster exposure times and high resolutions due to the greater amount of light being received, but at the expense of the images depth of field. All of these components whether they be manually set, or auto metered, determine what objects will be the shadows, highlights, and mid tone ranges of the image, (meaning those variables set the "blackest black" minimum luminosity or "whitest white" maximum luminosity in the image. Therefore an images range from maximum to minimum luminosity is not a function of the ccd or films range alone, but the amount of light received from the objects being viewed based on a number of variables (lens, f/stop, film speed/ccd specs, exposure time, desired zones, developing times for film, and print/image manipulation. Please see "zone system", and you will find that any image is a balance of capturing the subject's details in zone V, while at the same time not blowing out the details of the shadows zones III,II and highlights zones VII,VIII which is much different than the specs of the film or ccd (see luminous-landscape.com below for the simplified zone system description). Ok now, the whitest or most luminous object will be mapped as the highest point on the cielab z axis for that image, (with the slight biases introduced from the tristumulus value), the black or least luminous object will be the lowest point on the z axis with some biases, where the dynamic range is the difference of luminosities, minimum to maximum, and the logarithmic relationship from one to the other is the gamma (the connecting grey values in between). Printer's dynamic ranges are determined by the ink/media relationship or how much ink can be placed on the media usually making a CMY black, without running bleeding or buckling. A specific profile for printing is not just unique to that device, but is unique to that paper and ink set as well and requires setting the ink limits (described above) and is then followed by the careful balancing the colors and grays, that make the full color range or palette the printer can produce, meaning the images produced from a printer have a dynamic range that is a function of the inks and paper, and not the ccd. A monitors dynamic range is determined by the quality of the blackness of the screen, as compared to the best balanced and whitest white that can be achieved from the phosphor emissions, but the problem is a monitors phosphors change over time, meaning that the dynamic range is, dynamic, no pun intended, but that's the problem with monitors and keeping them calibrated. An images dynamic range on film can be determined by measuring the differences in the film densities in the most dense region (least luminous) setting the minimum, compared to the least dense (most luminous) setting the luminosity maximum, on a densitometer, which will show the final dynamic range is much less than the film is capable of producing, and was not just determined by the films range, but by the specifics that adjusted the exposure setting to the lighting conditions when the image was taken. Which once again shows that the human perception and color constancy are pretty unique attributes of human adaptation when were are compared to a device like a ccd or material like film. Now the greater amount of bits, the more information, but that information does not increase the dynamic range, it only parses the grey scale in between the minimum and maximum into finer sections, resulting in slight differences in the shadows, and mid-tones especially, but the same cielab space is utilized with the same limitations, the differences between 8 an 16 bit images are the 16 bit data is just parsed a little better resulting in smoother transitions, meaning 16 bit images aint all that you make them out to be. So therefore analyzing colors (or what you want to imply is missing) from an image strictly based on the ccd's or films specifications alone is not logical, and will yield incorrect results because that analysis does not the completely take into account system involved with producing the image. So brad, yes ccd's have great capabilities, but humans capturing the image can describe the object with words in such a way that compliments what the ccd produces, as humans are part of the viewing end of the equation, so therefore they should be on the image capturing end to better qualify the observed phenomena. Therefore once again it is human nature to creatively/subjectively describe events and sights (an observed events colors) with words that present a feeling to the reader that is far beyond the characters composing the text, and that is why humans must be part of space travel... Color Research Lab NASA Ames Research Center http://colorusage.arc.nasa.gov/lum_and_chrom.php Rochester Institute of Technolgy Munsell Color Institute http://www.cis.rit.edu/mcsl/ Information on color spaces, color conversions, etc. Bruce Lindbloom's website http://www.brucelindbloom.com/ Simplified Zone System http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...e_system.shtml Exposure value calculations The Science of Photography http://johnlind.tripod.com/science/scienceexposure.html |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 23, 5:47 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote: On Feb 23, 4:59 pm, BradGuth wrote:"My goodness, aren't we chuck full of damage-control infomercial" but In a previous thread brad stated the following "Thanks to our "no kid left behind" policy, as of prior to CCD camera imaging perhaps all of 0.1% of Americans even understood what photographic spectrum sensitivity and the associated DR(dynamic range) of B&W or color film even meant. Since the advent of commercial/ consumer CCD cameras and the continued dumbing down of America, I'd say that fewer than 0.0001% (that's one out of a million)"http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/msg/af4b4bd03e8c55aa And he also stated the following "If any of this PhotoShop or whatever digital photographic software usage is simply too much for your eye-candy speed or naysay mindset, then perhaps you should not even be posting anywhere within Usenet science, or contributing into most any other public space/astronomy or astrophysics related forums, especially since so many of you folks seem to lack the most basic of digital image observationology skills."http://groups.google.com/group/sci.space.history/msg/e99f67ca6b5be403 Well I just demonstrated to you dynamic range, human color perception, along with ciecolor space, with citations showing the science backing my words, and you cannot handle that fact! So im laughing at you brad, because that means you did not take the time to understand or comprehend the information i presented, which at this point means you don't even have any intention of expanding beyond your "spec candy" descriptions, and therefore you have no place to criticize anybody's observational skills, or their understanding of ccd imaging as I have shown you have a lot to learn, and maybe you should take your own advice and "not even be posting anywhere within Usenet science"... laughing your quoting numbers like "spec. candy", as if you really understood what the numbers mean, much less that the ccd is but one component of the digital imaging system. Ok lets try it this way humans are either going to view the image in the print form or on a monitor, both of which have their own dynamic ranges from black (min), to a white (max), that is independent of the ccd's dynamic range. Now venturing into the area of human color perception is necessary if someone wants to reproduce what the human "sees", as the sequence goes from humans capturing the image, image processing and finally viewing of the image on paper or on a monitor. Now even if you take humans out of the image capture part of the equation, you still have to have the image processing for viewing, meaning the ccd's capabilities are just part of the system, just like the silver halide crystals on film are but one part of the sequence that reproduces what the "eye sees". So I think its funny that you seem to be stuck on comparing a devices capabilities against the human visual system without understanding the latter So actually I did answer your question, you just did not understand the answer, nor how it directly relates to your constant ranting about dynamic range, that is why you go from regurgitating numbers of a chips specifications, to questioning the results of the image, when you really don't know what is going on in the optics of the device or the human visual system. The human visual system specifically analyzes and compares the colors of the electromagnetic spectrum with photo pigment responses (short medium and long cones, with contributions from the rods) spanning a range of about 1.3 electron volts of energy covering from reds to blues, and through primary and secondary comparisons our brain perceives what Newton termed extra-spectral hues, completing a connection of low energy reds to the high energy blues. The concept of human color perception is not just describing eye candy, as the red/ green and yellow/blue opposition responses in the human eye are what make up the cie Lab color space axis where ALL the data from the ccd image is mapped. Cie lab space is a 3d Cartesian plane based on the results of experiments that studied how the human visual system responds to stimuli. Luminosity is represented on the z axis going from absolute black to white (0 to 100), with red/green yellow/blue opponency represented on the x, y axis +/-100 in either direction: the x axis is lower case a, going from greenish (-a), toward being reddish (+a) (red vs. green), the y axis is the lower case b and goes from bluish (-b) towards yellowish (+b) yellow vs. blue. Now given all the data captured by any ccd has to be mapped to this coordinate system, and given the fact that same system is based on the human visual system you need to learn a lot more because cielab space itself does not contain all of the colors the human eye can detect, i.e. its missing some greens and extra spectral hues (see lab gamut display brucelindbloom.com) The Most expensive professional digital cameras on the market do not allow the image to be mapped to custom color spaces or color profiles but instead utilize srgb, or adobergb, which does not encompass all the volume of the cielab space, resulting in an even smaller range of colors than what the human "eye sees". (On a side note possibly the reason for colormatch being the profile for the messenger mercury probe images, is simply because even though colormatch color space is small, no data is lost in image transfers after the image has been mapped to that particular color space) . The capacity of a ccd can be reduced to specific wavelength ranges by manner of filter wheels, or template overlaying on the ccd, but you are still counting photons in bins, which as I previously stated is different from how human color perception is achieved through relative comparisons of photo pigment responses (CIE 1931 XYZ color matching functions see nasa ames color research lab), and comparisons of those comparisons. One of the unique aspects of the human visual system is that it attempts to preserve an objects color even in lighting conditions that change from approx 10,000 Kelvin's (midday bluish), to about 2700 Kelvin's (sunset and sunrise reddish). The illuminant whether it is natural or artificial will have a spectral power distribution that can be represented by a tristimulus value, which will be the "white" in our field of view. The tristimulus of the illuminant can be represented in chromacity diagrams, showing the white point of that illuminant, 5000 Kelvin's = d50, and 6500 Kelvin's = d65, indicating the warmness or coolness of the particular white. Now the white point of the color space that the ccd image is mapped to is set by the color profile itself (see brucelindbloom.com for profiles and info), and therefore even though digital imaging devices allow the user to set the color temp, and white balance, is still is using discrete settings, which will then be mapped based on the color spaces white point, which is much different from how the human eye adapts to changing light conditions. An image captured on film or on ccd, is metered so the energy received over a period of time does not overexpose the best detail in the desired subject, which is accomplished by adjusting the exposure time or the lens iris diameter (f/stop), based on the films speed or equivalent digital settings. No imaging system is perfect, as optically there are trade offs, smaller lens iris diameters yields larger depth of field, but less resolution and longer exposure times, while larger lens iris diameter settings yield faster exposure times and high resolutions due to the greater amount of light being received, but at the expense of the images depth of field. All of these components whether they be manually set, or auto metered, determine what objects will be the shadows, highlights, and mid tone ranges of the image, (meaning those variables set the "blackest black" minimum luminosity or "whitest white" maximum luminosity in the image. Therefore an images range from maximum to minimum luminosity is not a function of the ccd or films range alone, but the amount of light received from the objects being viewed based on a number of variables (lens, f/stop, film speed/ccd specs, exposure time, desired zones, developing times for film, and print/image manipulation. Please see "zone system", and you will find that any image is a balance of capturing the subject's details in zone V, while at the same time not blowing out the details of the shadows zones III,II and highlights zones VII,VIII which is much different than the specs of the film or ccd (see luminous-landscape.com below for the simplified zone system description). Ok now, the whitest or most luminous object will be mapped as the highest point on the cielab z axis for that image, (with the slight biases introduced from the tristumulus value), the black or least luminous object will be the lowest point on the z axis with some biases, where the dynamic range is the difference of luminosities, minimum to maximum, and the logarithmic relationship from one to the other is the gamma (the connecting grey values in between). Printer's dynamic ranges are determined by the ink/media relationship or how much ink can be placed on the media usually making a CMY black, without running bleeding or buckling. A specific profile for printing is not just unique to that device, but is unique to that paper and ink set as well and requires setting the ink limits (described above) and is then followed by the careful balancing the colors and grays, that make the full color range or palette the printer can produce, meaning the images produced from a printer have a dynamic range that is a function of the inks and paper, and not the ccd. A monitors dynamic range is determined by the quality of the blackness of the screen, as compared to the best balanced and whitest white that can be achieved from the phosphor emissions, but the problem is a monitors phosphors change over time, meaning that ... read more » Don't need to "read more", because if that's what makes you a happy camper, then so be it, and remember that it took the sorts of brown- nosed minions exactly like yourself to put a smile on Hitler's face, as well as a smirk on our resident LLPOF warlord's face. Secondly, without your kind, there simply couldn't be the dark side, whereas by your mindset we'd only have those gray pastel colors of our moon and Mercury, as forever limited to your skewed mindset that's all mainstream status quo hype and of no real science other than Old Testament approved. Your pretending at being smart and yet playing along as otherwise dumb and dumber simply doesn't cut it, but then your being a pretend atheist is not exactly much better off. Do you teach physics ans science, perhaps 5th grade? . - Brad Guth |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
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" |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
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 |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 24, 7:27 am, BradGuth wrote:" 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." Laughing, you just posted the same old trash, but in a slightly repackaged form, but the problem is you have not shown any reduction of you idiocy, or ignorance. In order for you to analyze the images like you have, you need to not just know film type and speed, but the lens used, and the f/stop, and resulting exposure time all of which determine how white an astronauts space suit is compared to the back round, midtones etc. Once again regurgitating numbers from what "should have been" seen does not address the image itself, and so you keep looking for things, but you clearly do not have an understanding of what you are looking at, or how the image was produced. Now the same principles that I have stated apply to the analysis of all images, so your diatribes into what im not addressing are a joke, and your demands for me to answer your loaded questions are an even bigger joke, thanks for the Sunday morning laugh brad.... And no im not "unwilling to deal with the truth of whatever's off-world" as you just stated, but I do love to learn about earth, including from the unique view the astronauts have aboard the ISS. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...16e008436.html International Space Station Imagery "ISS016-E-008436 (26 Oct. 2007) --- Beirut Metropolitan Area, Lebanon is featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 16 crewmember on the International Space Station. The capital of Lebanon, Beirut is located along the southeastern shoreline of the Mediterranean Sea. According to geologists, the metropolitan area is built on a small peninsula composed mainly of sedimentary rock deposited over the past 100 million years or so. The growth of the city eastwards is bounded by foothills of the more mountainous interior of Lebanon (sparsely settled greenish brown region visible at upper right). While this sedimentary platform is stable, the country of Lebanon is located along a major transform fault zone, or region where the African and Arabian tectonic plates are moving laterally in relation to (and against) each other. This active tectonism creates an earthquake hazard for the country. The Roum Fault, one of the fault strands that is part of the transform boundary, is located directly to the south of the Beirut metropolitan area. Other distinctive features visible in this image include the Rafic Hariri Airport at lower right, the city sports arena at center, and several areas of green and open space (such a large golf course at center). Also visible in the image are several plumes of sediment along the coastline -- the most striking of which are located near the airport. The general lack of vegetation in the airport may promote higher degrees of soil transport by surface water runoff or wind." |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 24, 8:05 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote: On Feb 24, 7:27 am, BradGuth wrote:" 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." Laughing, you just posted the same old trash, but in a slightly repackaged form, but the problem is you have not shown any reduction of you idiocy, or ignorance. In order for you to analyze the images like you have, you need to not just know film type and speed, but the lens used, and the f/stop, and resulting exposure time all of which determine how white an astronauts space suit is compared to the back round, midtones etc. Once again regurgitating numbers from what "should have been" seen does not address the image itself, and so you keep looking for things, but you clearly do not have an understanding of what you are looking at, or how the image was produced. Now the same principles that I have stated apply to the analysis of all images, so your diatribes into what im not addressing are a joke, and your demands for me to answer your loaded questions are an even bigger joke, thanks for the Sunday morning laugh brad.... And no im not "unwilling to deal with the truth of whatever's off-world" as you just stated, but I do love to learn about earth, including from the unique view the astronauts have aboard the ISS. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...-16/html/iss01... International Space Station Imagery "ISS016-E-008436 (26 Oct. 2007) --- Beirut Metropolitan Area, Lebanon is featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 16 crewmember on the International Space Station. The capital of Lebanon, Beirut is located along the southeastern shoreline of the Mediterranean Sea. According to geologists, the metropolitan area is built on a small peninsula composed mainly of sedimentary rock deposited over the past 100 million years or so. The growth of the city eastwards is bounded by foothills of the more mountainous interior of Lebanon (sparsely settled greenish brown region visible at upper right). While this sedimentary platform is stable, the country of Lebanon is located along a major transform fault zone, or region where the African and Arabian tectonic plates are moving laterally in relation to (and against) each other. This active tectonism creates an earthquake hazard for the country. The Roum Fault, one of the fault strands that is part of the transform boundary, is located directly to the south of the Beirut metropolitan area. Other distinctive features visible in this image include the Rafic Hariri Airport at lower right, the city sports arena at center, and several areas of green and open space (such a large golf course at center). Also visible in the image are several plumes of sediment along the coastline -- the most striking of which are located near the airport. The general lack of vegetation in the airport may promote higher degrees of soil transport by surface water runoff or wind." If that's what makes our Earth-only mindset puppet-masters like yourself happy campers, then so be it. No wonder we're headed for WWIII, $10/gallon and $1/kwhr just as fast as you folks and fellow rusemasters of the Old Testament thumping kind can manage. Keep pretending that all off-world matters simply do not matter, as well as naysaying as to the ongoing demise of our frail environment at the same time. After all, it's what your God(s) would appreciate more than anything else. BTW, did you go to your pretend atheists sunday school, and teach those unfortunate kids how to lie their infomercial spewing little butts off, by way of avoiding the truth via excluding science or banishing related evidence that could otherwise rock your mainstream status quo boat? .. - Brad Guth |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 24, 2:08 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Feb 24, 8:05 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote: On Feb 24, 7:27 am, BradGuth wrote:" 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." Laughing, you just posted the same old trash, but in a slightly repackaged form, but the problem is you have not shown any reduction of you idiocy, or ignorance. In order for you to analyze the images like you have, you need to not just know film type and speed, but the lens used, and the f/stop, and resulting exposure time all of which determine how white an astronauts space suit is compared to the back round, midtones etc. Once again regurgitating numbers from what "should have been" seen does not address the image itself, and so you keep looking for things, but you clearly do not have an understanding of what you are looking at, or how the image was produced. Now the same principles that I have stated apply to the analysis of all images, so your diatribes into what im not addressing are a joke, and your demands for me to answer your loaded questions are an even bigger joke, thanks for the Sunday morning laugh brad.... And no im not "unwilling to deal with the truth of whatever's off-world" as you just stated, but I do love to learn about earth, including from the unique view the astronauts have aboard the ISS. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...-16/html/iss01... International Space Station Imagery "ISS016-E-008436 (26 Oct. 2007) --- Beirut Metropolitan Area, Lebanon is featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 16 crewmember on the International Space Station. The capital of Lebanon, Beirut is located along the southeastern shoreline of the Mediterranean Sea. According to geologists, the metropolitan area is built on a small peninsula composed mainly of sedimentary rock deposited over the past 100 million years or so. The growth of the city eastwards is bounded by foothills of the more mountainous interior of Lebanon (sparsely settled greenish brown region visible at upper right). While this sedimentary platform is stable, the country of Lebanon is located along a major transform fault zone, or region where the African and Arabian tectonic plates are moving laterally in relation to (and against) each other. This active tectonism creates an earthquake hazard for the country. The Roum Fault, one of the fault strands that is part of the transform boundary, is located directly to the south of the Beirut metropolitan area. Other distinctive features visible in this image include the Rafic Hariri Airport at lower right, the city sports arena at center, and several areas of green and open space (such a large golf course at center). Also visible in the image are several plumes of sediment along the coastline -- the most striking of which are located near the airport. The general lack of vegetation in the airport may promote higher degrees of soil transport by surface water runoff or wind." If that's what makes our Earth-only mindset puppet-masters like yourself happy campers, then so be it. No wonder we're headed for WWIII, $10/gallon and $1/kwhr just as fast as you folks and fellow rusemasters of the Old Testament thumping kind can manage. Keep pretending that all off-world matters simply do not matter, as well as naysaying as to the ongoing demise of our frail environment at the same time. After all, it's what your God(s) would appreciate more than anything else. BTW, did you go to your pretend atheists sunday school, and teach those unfortunate kids how to lie their infomercial spewing little butts off, by way of avoiding the truth via excluding science or banishing related evidence that could otherwise rock your mainstream status quo boat? . - Brad Guth- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - so what you just admitted is that your argument in this thread (and your image analysis skills for that matter) has been completely reduced down to you making illogical attacks on me, that's pathetic brad.... "http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-16/html/ iss016e021564.html International Space Station Imagery ISS016-E-021564 (7 Jan. 2008) --- Paris, France is featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 16 crewmember on the International Space Station. A crisp, clear winter day over France provided a detailed view of the city of Paris. This image shows the recognizable street pattern of the city - and some of the world's most notable landmarks - along the Seine River. One of the main avenues radiating like spokes from the Arc de Triomphe (lower right) is the Avenue des Champs-Elysees running southeast to the Garden of Tuileries (Jardin des Tuileries). The garden -- recognizable by its light green color relative to the surrounding built materials -- was originally commissioned by Catherine de Medici in 1559, and is now bounded by the Place de la Concorde to the northeast and the Louvre museum along the Seine River at the southeast end. Other, similarly colored parks and greenspaces are visible throughout the image. Farther south on the Seine is the Ile de la Cite, location of the famous Notre Dame cathedral. Perhaps most prominent is the characteristic "A" profile of the Eiffel Tower west of the Jardin des Tuileries, highlighted by morning sunlight" |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16
On Feb 24, 2:30 pm, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
wrote: On Feb 24, 2:08 pm, BradGuth wrote: On Feb 24, 8:05 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation wrote: On Feb 24, 7:27 am, BradGuth wrote:" 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." Laughing, you just posted the same old trash, but in a slightly repackaged form, but the problem is you have not shown any reduction of you idiocy, or ignorance. In order for you to analyze the images like you have, you need to not just know film type and speed, but the lens used, and the f/stop, and resulting exposure time all of which determine how white an astronauts space suit is compared to the back round, midtones etc. Once again regurgitating numbers from what "should have been" seen does not address the image itself, and so you keep looking for things, but you clearly do not have an understanding of what you are looking at, or how the image was produced. Now the same principles that I have stated apply to the analysis of all images, so your diatribes into what im not addressing are a joke, and your demands for me to answer your loaded questions are an even bigger joke, thanks for the Sunday morning laugh brad.... And no im not "unwilling to deal with the truth of whatever's off-world" as you just stated, but I do love to learn about earth, including from the unique view the astronauts have aboard the ISS. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/...-16/html/iss01... International Space Station Imagery "ISS016-E-008436 (26 Oct. 2007) --- Beirut Metropolitan Area, Lebanon is featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 16 crewmember on the International Space Station. The capital of Lebanon, Beirut is located along the southeastern shoreline of the Mediterranean Sea. According to geologists, the metropolitan area is built on a small peninsula composed mainly of sedimentary rock deposited over the past 100 million years or so. The growth of the city eastwards is bounded by foothills of the more mountainous interior of Lebanon (sparsely settled greenish brown region visible at upper right). While this sedimentary platform is stable, the country of Lebanon is located along a major transform fault zone, or region where the African and Arabian tectonic plates are moving laterally in relation to (and against) each other. This active tectonism creates an earthquake hazard for the country. The Roum Fault, one of the fault strands that is part of the transform boundary, is located directly to the south of the Beirut metropolitan area. Other distinctive features visible in this image include the Rafic Hariri Airport at lower right, the city sports arena at center, and several areas of green and open space (such a large golf course at center). Also visible in the image are several plumes of sediment along the coastline -- the most striking of which are located near the airport. The general lack of vegetation in the airport may promote higher degrees of soil transport by surface water runoff or wind." If that's what makes our Earth-only mindset puppet-masters like yourself happy campers, then so be it. No wonder we're headed for WWIII, $10/gallon and $1/kwhr just as fast as you folks and fellow rusemasters of the Old Testament thumping kind can manage. Keep pretending that all off-world matters simply do not matter, as well as naysaying as to the ongoing demise of our frail environment at the same time. After all, it's what your God(s) would appreciate more than anything else. BTW, did you go to your pretend atheists sunday school, and teach those unfortunate kids how to lie their infomercial spewing little butts off, by way of avoiding the truth via excluding science or banishing related evidence that could otherwise rock your mainstream status quo boat? . - Brad Guth- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - so what you just admitted is that your argument in this thread (and your image analysis skills for that matter) has been completely reduced down to you making illogical attacks on me, that's pathetic brad.... "http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-16/html/ iss016e021564.html International Space Station Imagery ISS016-E-021564 (7 Jan. 2008) --- Paris, France is featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 16 crewmember on the International Space Station. A crisp, clear winter day over France provided a detailed view of the city of Paris. This image shows the recognizable street pattern of the city - and some of the world's most notable landmarks - along the Seine River. One of the main avenues radiating like spokes from the Arc de Triomphe (lower right) is the Avenue des Champs-Elysees running southeast to the Garden of Tuileries (Jardin des Tuileries). The garden -- recognizable by its light green color relative to the surrounding built materials -- was originally commissioned by Catherine de Medici in 1559, and is now bounded by the Place de la Concorde to the northeast and the Louvre museum along the Seine River at the southeast end. Other, similarly colored parks and greenspaces are visible throughout the image. Farther south on the Seine is the Ile de la Cite, location of the famous Notre Dame cathedral. Perhaps most prominent is the characteristic "A" profile of the Eiffel Tower west of the Jardin des Tuileries, highlighted by morning sunlight" There's nothing pathetic about sharing the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Apparently you've got a big problem with that, as much as you can't tolerate honestly deductive thinking unless it's Old Testament certified. BTW, if Venus along with its unlimited local energy cache to burn (sort of speak) isn't ET doable (including on behalf of us), then perhaps no other planet in the universe is worthy of a viable habitat or as a mineral resource. With all the MRSA, Stauff and numerous hybrid forms of humanly lethal pestilence running amuck, not to mention animal/plant extinctions and of even hybrid plant rot taking place and mother nature going GW postal as we prepare ourselves for WWIII, as such Earth is not exactly ET worthy, especially after humanity has so terribly pillaged, raped and mostly burned off its fossil fuels with no apparent regard for the future of having far less dry land for 1e10 souls to survive upon. Just for those of you that either can't or wouldn't dare think independently within the box, much less deductively think outside, here's a little something that's quite interesting, as getting the peer reviewed benefit of the doubt. Alex Collier / By Michael Salla, PhD http://www.exopolitics.org http://www.rense.com/general54/zlecx.htm http://utenti.lycos.it/paolaharris/acollier_eng.htm http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-66.htm plus many other links worth getting our undivided attention. For those of you hell bent upon sticking with your terrestrial limited God(s), never mind because, no matters what the evidence or physics backing up the best available science, there's simply no hope for those in charge of snookering humanity for all it's worth, or otherwise simply self dumbfounded past the point of no return. In other words, there's not much sense in beating a dead horse to death. .. - Brad Guth |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Great missions STS-122 & Expedition 16 | columbiaaccidentinvestigation | Space Shuttle | 191 | March 11th 08 11:39 PM |
Expedition 14/Expedition 13/Ansari Farewells and Hatch Closure | John | Space Station | 0 | September 28th 06 09:58 PM |
Expedition 13/ Pontes/ Expedition 12 Joint Crew News Conference | John | Space Station | 0 | April 4th 06 03:42 PM |
Expedition 13/ Pontes/ Expedition 12 Joint Crew News Conference | John | Space Station | 0 | April 3rd 06 10:05 PM |