> This is just sensationalism. This is just art. Satellite imagery in the raw form when it is not yet registered to a map has a beauty to it that is lost in e

> This is just sensationalism. This is just art. Satellite imagery in the raw form when it is not yet registered to a map has a beauty to it that is lost in everyday mapping products, e.g. satnav and weather maps. Normally satnav and weather maps interpret the image for you. With raw imagery you have to interpret the image for yourself. The imagery may not be in normal 'visible' colours, it can be like HDR on steroids, to reveal patterns and detail only once you adjust the levels/curves to fit the limited range of colours that a computer screen can show. Perhaps the most fascinating remote sensing imagery is of the areas of the world you don't normally see, e.g. polar latitudes, the seas off coastal areas and the deserts. It is a bit like looking at the stars with a very powerful telescope but in reverse. The thing is though is that you need to have quite a lot of inner child or actually be aged nine to truly appreciate the wonder and explore the dataset that bit more. I think that good art has to get people asking questions and thinking a bit. Usually, as per the recent 'Banksy' spectacle (art business) there is a big price tag attached to the 'art'. This 'art' fails to get people beyond the question of 'how much is it worth in dollars' whereas here I think that with this Area 51 inspired 'installation' we have much better questions being asked and answered, as per what you wrote here. It is also good that the star of the show is the remotely sensed image, not the painting of it, no disrespect to the painting which I think is rather special and does the subject justice.