A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Black and White Telescope



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 27th 03, 10:02 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Black and White Telescope

Hi All -

I was showing Mars to some friends, as I suppose a lot of us are lately(!)
and a question came up that I couldn't eloquently explain -

Why does Mars, or anyplanet, appear as "black and white" through a pretty
good telescope, while all the photos are in glorious color?

My weak explanation was that I "couldn't afford a color telescope," then I
tried to remember the rods and cones in the eye and all that. But I know
there is a better and shorter way to explain this...

Thanks!
Brian


  #2  
Old August 27th 03, 03:47 PM
Starlord
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've never seen mars as B/W, it's always at lest orange in color.


--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.Netfirms.com/
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

wrote in message
...
Hi All -

I was showing Mars to some friends, as I suppose a lot of us are lately(!)
and a question came up that I couldn't eloquently explain -

Why does Mars, or anyplanet, appear as "black and white" through a pretty
good telescope, while all the photos are in glorious color?

My weak explanation was that I "couldn't afford a color telescope," then I
tried to remember the rods and cones in the eye and all that. But I know
there is a better and shorter way to explain this...

Thanks!
Brian




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/03


  #4  
Old August 27th 03, 06:48 PM
Jonathan Silverlight
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In message ,
writes
Hi All -

I was showing Mars to some friends, as I suppose a lot of us are lately(!)
and a question came up that I couldn't eloquently explain -

Why does Mars, or anyplanet, appear as "black and white" through a pretty
good telescope, while all the photos are in glorious color?

My weak explanation was that I "couldn't afford a color telescope," then I
tried to remember the rods and cones in the eye and all that. But I know
there is a better and shorter way to explain this...


I've never seen Mars as anything but pale orange with faint grey
markings - I suspect that anyone who sees green markings is getting a
contrast effect with the orange. But Mars is definitely bright enough
to stimulate the rods in the eye (the colour sensors, if I guessed
wrong)
Similarly Jupiter appears yellow and brown and occasionally red (the
"Great Red Spot" is currently quite pale, AFAIK), but it isn't as bright
as the processed pictures you will see. That's the main problem - a lot
of pictures are "enhanced".
Even Saturn appears yellow.
A very few deep-sky objects show colour, but normally they are too
faint. The colour is real, though, and if you see a picture of a bright
red nebula that's how it would appear if your eyes were sensitive
enough. Hubble telescope pictures often use green for the wavelength
that is really red, though.
Only the Moon and Venus are really colourless under clear skies (and I
suspect other people may argue this).

To keep it short, if you're seeing a black and white planet I'm puzzled!
It isn't really the "red planet", but it's much redder than most stars
or planets.
--
"Roads in space for rockets to travel....four-dimensional roads, curving with
relativity"
Mail to jsilverlight AT merseia.fsnet.co.uk is welcome.
Or visit Jonathan's Space Site
http://www.merseia.fsnet.co.uk
  #5  
Old August 27th 03, 09:52 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Huh, well your explanation is good, but I am puzzled about the color. I am
not seeing any red through my telescope, although I am naked eye.

Perhaps I have had more "distortion being in Los Angeles? It's been quite
hot and "wavy" here...


"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote in message
...
In message ,
writes
Hi All -

I was showing Mars to some friends, as I suppose a lot of us are

lately(!)
and a question came up that I couldn't eloquently explain -

Why does Mars, or anyplanet, appear as "black and white" through a pretty
good telescope, while all the photos are in glorious color?

My weak explanation was that I "couldn't afford a color telescope," then

I
tried to remember the rods and cones in the eye and all that. But I know
there is a better and shorter way to explain this...


I've never seen Mars as anything but pale orange with faint grey
markings - I suspect that anyone who sees green markings is getting a
contrast effect with the orange. But Mars is definitely bright enough
to stimulate the rods in the eye (the colour sensors, if I guessed
wrong)
Similarly Jupiter appears yellow and brown and occasionally red (the
"Great Red Spot" is currently quite pale, AFAIK), but it isn't as bright
as the processed pictures you will see. That's the main problem - a lot
of pictures are "enhanced".
Even Saturn appears yellow.
A very few deep-sky objects show colour, but normally they are too
faint. The colour is real, though, and if you see a picture of a bright
red nebula that's how it would appear if your eyes were sensitive
enough. Hubble telescope pictures often use green for the wavelength
that is really red, though.
Only the Moon and Venus are really colourless under clear skies (and I
suspect other people may argue this).

To keep it short, if you're seeing a black and white planet I'm puzzled!
It isn't really the "red planet", but it's much redder than most stars
or planets.
--
"Roads in space for rockets to travel....four-dimensional roads, curving

with
relativity"
Mail to jsilverlight AT merseia.fsnet.co.uk is welcome.
Or visit Jonathan's Space Site
http://www.merseia.fsnet.co.uk


  #6  
Old August 27th 03, 10:26 PM
Ron Sparks
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I was showing Mars to some friends, as I suppose a lot of us are lately(!)
and a question came up that I couldn't eloquently explain -

Why does Mars, or anyplanet, appear as "black and white" through a pretty
good telescope, while all the photos are in glorious color?

My weak explanation was that I "couldn't afford a color telescope," then I
tried to remember the rods and cones in the eye and all that. But I know
there is a better and shorter way to explain this...


Brian,

This is often disappointing to amateur astronomers and newcomers; the fact
that the view of the planets through the telescope is not nearly as
magnificent as those seen in books. There are a couple of reasons for this.

First, your eye is seeing the planet "instantly." A camera usually exposes
the film for a significant period of time. This allows the sensitive film
to absorb more light. Your eye constantly "refreshes" itself so you don't
have to ability to just "not blink" and get more light to the cones in your
eye. (This is a poor explanation so if anyone can elucidate on this point,
I would be appreciative.)

Secondly, most of those beautiful images you see are the juxtaposition of
more than one photo taken with different filters. Filters are used to
enhance certain features on planets and other celestial objects. They block
certain wavelengths and let others through. For instance, now that Mars is
so close, many of us take to viewing it nightly. I use a red filter to
enhance the surface details and a yellow filter to enhance my view of the
plains.

Thirdly, a lot of the images in books and magazines are digitally touched
up. The sky is darkened so it is truly black instead of a dark gray (as is
common in light-polluted areas), and other techniques are used to enhance
the image.

The combination of juxtaposing long-exposure images taken with different
filters and digital touchups accounts for the breath-taking images you see
in print and media. With the naked eye, the views are not quite as
magnificent if you're looking for instant gratification, but they are
spectacular nonetheless.

I hope this helps.


Ron Sparks
http://www.iSciFiStory.com


  #7  
Old August 28th 03, 09:21 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yeah, Excactly. Surprising the lenses don't cough.


"pinkling" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:52:48 GMT in
,
graced the world with this thought:


Perhaps I have had more "distortion being in Los Angeles? It's been quite
hot and "wavy" here...

...with that really sweet natural green atmospheric filter....



  #8  
Old August 28th 03, 09:23 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Good info - thanks. I assume being in Palmdale you have pretty decent skies,
i.e. less light pollution than LA?

"Starlord" wrote in message
...
I get some waving when it first comes up, but once it's up about 11pm it's

nice
then and I'm north of you out past palmdale by 30 miles.



--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.Netfirms.com/
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord

"pinkling" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:52:48 GMT in
,
graced the world with this thought:


Perhaps I have had more "distortion being in Los Angeles? It's been

quite
hot and "wavy" here...

...with that really sweet natural green atmospheric filter....



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/03




  #9  
Old August 28th 03, 09:25 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Yes, thanks Ron - That's a great explanation. Thanks!

Brian

"Ron Sparks" wrote in message
...
I was showing Mars to some friends, as I suppose a lot of us are

lately(!)
and a question came up that I couldn't eloquently explain -

Why does Mars, or anyplanet, appear as "black and white" through a

pretty
good telescope, while all the photos are in glorious color?

My weak explanation was that I "couldn't afford a color telescope," then

I
tried to remember the rods and cones in the eye and all that. But I know
there is a better and shorter way to explain this...


Brian,

This is often disappointing to amateur astronomers and newcomers; the fact
that the view of the planets through the telescope is not nearly as
magnificent as those seen in books. There are a couple of reasons for

this.

First, your eye is seeing the planet "instantly." A camera usually

exposes
the film for a significant period of time. This allows the sensitive film
to absorb more light. Your eye constantly "refreshes" itself so you don't
have to ability to just "not blink" and get more light to the cones in

your
eye. (This is a poor explanation so if anyone can elucidate on this

point,
I would be appreciative.)

Secondly, most of those beautiful images you see are the juxtaposition of
more than one photo taken with different filters. Filters are used to
enhance certain features on planets and other celestial objects. They

block
certain wavelengths and let others through. For instance, now that Mars

is
so close, many of us take to viewing it nightly. I use a red filter to
enhance the surface details and a yellow filter to enhance my view of the
plains.

Thirdly, a lot of the images in books and magazines are digitally touched
up. The sky is darkened so it is truly black instead of a dark gray (as

is
common in light-polluted areas), and other techniques are used to enhance
the image.

The combination of juxtaposing long-exposure images taken with different
filters and digital touchups accounts for the breath-taking images you see
in print and media. With the naked eye, the views are not quite as
magnificent if you're looking for instant gratification, but they are
spectacular nonetheless.

I hope this helps.


Ron Sparks
http://www.iSciFiStory.com




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Universe Born in Black Hole Explosion? Klaatu Amateur Astronomy 12 September 21st 03 12:12 AM
Black and White Astrophotography Question Art Amateur Astronomy 5 August 4th 03 07:03 PM
Link between Black Holes and Galaxies Discovered in Our Own Backyard(Forwarded) Andrew Yee Astronomy Misc 0 July 17th 03 07:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.