8 ms·

Wow amazing work! The scale of this project reminds me of another photographer's five year project of creating a 2.5 gigapixel photo of Orion: https://orion2020

by dding 6y ago

Wow amazing work! The scale of this project reminds me of another photographer's five year project of creating a 2.5 gigapixel photo of Orion: https://orion2020v5b.spaceforeverybody.com/ https://orion2020v5b.spaceforeverybody.com/

clon 6y ago
This is fantastic. I immediately wondered how he managed to seamlessly mosaic together what is surely hundreds of images and thousands of subs. Here are the details: https://space4everybody.com/processing-details/ https://space4everybody.com/processing-details/ And equipment: https://space4everybody.com/technical-details-equipment/ https://space4everybody.com/technical-details-equipment/ Nothing too fancy (in astrophotography relative terms). A decent refractor and mono camera (such parameters have come down in price by 2-3 times, ASI2600MM is comparable) and most importantly, a solid pier/mount. 267 Individual panels (including reshoots) 12,816 Individual light frames 65,000 x 35,000 in it’s entirety 5 States traversed to image 640.8 Imaging hours 500+ Editing hours 2.5 Gigapixel Image 1.6 Pixel scale 5 Years 1 Mosaic Just WOW
- spartanatreyu 6y ago
  Unfortunately they don't seem to have a link to the final "full-res" image. I'd love to put that with my collection of other massive-res images. My screensaver pans between random spots on massive images in a folder.
  - groby_b 6y ago
    They sell their photography. I'm sure you can reach out for a price quote.
  - jonxa 6y ago
    Hey, would you share your library publicly or privately? I've been looking for something like this :) Also, check out dezoomify[0] [0] https://ophir.alwaysdata.net/dezoomify/dezoomify.html https://ophir.alwaysdata.net/dezoomify/dezoomify.html
    - spartanatreyu 6y ago
      Here's a link: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag4tKq5B7NFurglGuNpfDUKeHA7p?e=k9aejz https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag4tKq5B7NFurglGuNpfDUKeHA7p?e=k9aejz My libraries are always made of images I've found online. I've lost two libraries over time so I'm on my third one now. I haven't added to my library in a while, but I might spend a few hours looking for some more images this weekend. The current stats for my library: At the moment it's 1.47gb for 75 images. I'm not sure where I have copied each image from, but I know some are either from ESO or NASA's image of the day, except that I find the original non-browser friendly images and download those. If I can get an image I like larger than my 5k screen, I'll add it to my library. My average image size is 7156x5412. My largest image is 324,000,000 pixels (18,000x18,000), pretty sure it's the Orion Nebula. My smallest image is 2,958,400 pixels (so only 1720x1720), however any image that is surrounded by black (like a planet with no stars around may be cropped from time to time). Since my screensaver puts black around any images smaller than my 5k screen, it still works out. I'm pretty sure the smallest image is an image of Uranus from the Voyager that flew past it and I wanted to make sure I had an image of at least every planet in the Solar system and that was the best image of it I could find.
kgran 6y ago
Looking at these pictures, I've began to ponder how much of an influence the night sky has been in religion and mythology throughout the millennia.
- titzer 6y ago
  And in the modern world, we are blind to it because of light pollution. It's sad. One of the most amazing experiences ever, a truly dark, clear sky at night, is only accessible if you travel off-continent.
  - LilBytes 6y ago
    You better believe it. I couldn't believe what the sky looked like at night when I moved to Australia from the UK. And I was in a relatively suburban setting then. I regularly go camping now maybe every 1-2 months out into the outback. And the night sky, without exaggeration and using the words here sensibly, literally, never, gets old. In my 19 years in the UK I never saw anything like it. Edit: Admittedly I think the constant cloud coverage in the UK was more of a hindrance than the light pollution here I lived. Or at least it was so fucking cloudy so fucking often, I had no idea how bad the light pollution was. I remember when I first moved here and looked up to the sky from my back yard and I could see Orions Belt. Now I'm less than a novice, I only recognised it from Men in Black (don't judge me). But that feeling I had in that moment stuck with me. And I get such a ridiculous glee when I can drive 1-2 hours from Brisbane city and see the most ridiculous night skys I've ever seen. Keep travelling west and it just gets better and better. I can't wait to visit on of the Dark Night Sky locations. NSW, Australia: https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/conservation-and-heritage/our-parks/dark-sky-parks https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/conservation-and-herita...
    - titzer 6y ago
      Ah man, damn it! I spent 10 months in Australia, but most of it was during lockdown, and I didn't have a car. I only got 1 week of travel and didn't see much of the stars. My best experience was in Fiji and New Zealand, but I imagine that the outback could be even better. I've gone out to Mojave on super clear nights. Vegas is easily visible, almost like a sunrise. The Great Smoky Mountains look good on paper (light pollution map), but in practice they are quite clowdy / hazy, so viewing isn't good. I imagine northern Canada could also be quite good.
phaedrus 6y ago
Something about that Orion photo in particular makes it seem beyond belief that there is not other life around other stars in the galaxy.
- quesera 6y ago
  For me, it was this image and story that removed any shred of doubt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field The tiny speck of dust that is our whole world is less than a grain of sand on the beaches of the universe. We are not alone. Which doesn't mean that we would want to meet any of our neighbors!
  - medstrom 6y ago
    Frankly, since we only have ourselves to sample, we have no idea how large the survivorship bias is. It doesn't matter if there's googol of galaxies or just one galaxy, we have zero direct information on how easily life arises. Putting it another way, observing a googol of galaxies ought to pretty much not at all increase our confidence that other life exists, like how observing a 200% increase in a speed doesn't tell you anything when you don't know what the absolute speed was to start with.
    - TrispusAttucks 6y ago
      You're right in regards to sample size. However, one thing this argument often ignores is that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Life is 3.5 billion years old. The Earth was hot molten rock up until about 20 million years before life began. So we went from Zero to Life in 20 million. Once created it was so successful that it took over nearly every part of the Earth in a multitude of evolving forms. It seems improbable life makes it's appearance so improbably early on Earth that perhaps the only explanation is that life isn't so improbable after all. Perhaps it's even highly likely give the physics of the universe.
    - quesera 6y ago
      This is true, but I don't find it persuasive. We know that simple chemistry plus lots of energy can create more complicated chemistry. We have evidence that some protein molecules can be self-replicating under the right conditions. Given billions of parallel experiments over billions of years, I think it is vanishingly unlikely that exactly one has progressed to the point we would recognize as self-organizing. But that's faith, not proof. I'll defend it as the most reasonable and non-exceptional version of the story, but I won't claim it as absolute truth.

by dding 6y ago

clon 6y ago

This is fantastic. I immediately wondered how he managed to seamlessly mosaic together what is surely hundreds of images and thousands of subs. Here are the details: https://space4everybody.com/processing-details/ https://space4everybody.com/processing-details/ And equipment: https://space4everybody.com/technical-details-equipment/ https://space4everybody.com/technical-details-equipment/ Nothing too fancy (in astrophotography relative terms). A decent refractor and mono camera (such parameters have come down in price by 2-3 times, ASI2600MM is comparable) and most importantly, a solid pier/mount. 267 Individual panels (including reshoots) 12,816 Individual light frames 65,000 x 35,000 in it’s entirety 5 States traversed to image 640.8 Imaging hours 500+ Editing hours 2.5 Gigapixel Image 1.6 Pixel scale 5 Years 1 Mosaic Just WOW

spartanatreyu 6y ago
Unfortunately they don't seem to have a link to the final "full-res" image. I'd love to put that with my collection of other massive-res images. My screensaver pans between random spots on massive images in a folder.
- groby_b 6y ago
  They sell their photography. I'm sure you can reach out for a price quote.
- jonxa 6y ago
  Hey, would you share your library publicly or privately? I've been looking for something like this :) Also, check out dezoomify[0] [0] https://ophir.alwaysdata.net/dezoomify/dezoomify.html https://ophir.alwaysdata.net/dezoomify/dezoomify.html
  - spartanatreyu 6y ago
    Here's a link: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag4tKq5B7NFurglGuNpfDUKeHA7p?e=k9aejz https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ag4tKq5B7NFurglGuNpfDUKeHA7p?e=k9aejz My libraries are always made of images I've found online. I've lost two libraries over time so I'm on my third one now. I haven't added to my library in a while, but I might spend a few hours looking for some more images this weekend. The current stats for my library: At the moment it's 1.47gb for 75 images. I'm not sure where I have copied each image from, but I know some are either from ESO or NASA's image of the day, except that I find the original non-browser friendly images and download those. If I can get an image I like larger than my 5k screen, I'll add it to my library. My average image size is 7156x5412. My largest image is 324,000,000 pixels (18,000x18,000), pretty sure it's the Orion Nebula. My smallest image is 2,958,400 pixels (so only 1720x1720), however any image that is surrounded by black (like a planet with no stars around may be cropped from time to time). Since my screensaver puts black around any images smaller than my 5k screen, it still works out. I'm pretty sure the smallest image is an image of Uranus from the Voyager that flew past it and I wanted to make sure I had an image of at least every planet in the Solar system and that was the best image of it I could find.

kgran 6y ago

Looking at these pictures, I've began to ponder how much of an influence the night sky has been in religion and mythology throughout the millennia.

titzer 6y ago
And in the modern world, we are blind to it because of light pollution. It's sad. One of the most amazing experiences ever, a truly dark, clear sky at night, is only accessible if you travel off-continent.
- LilBytes 6y ago
  You better believe it. I couldn't believe what the sky looked like at night when I moved to Australia from the UK. And I was in a relatively suburban setting then. I regularly go camping now maybe every 1-2 months out into the outback. And the night sky, without exaggeration and using the words here sensibly, literally, never, gets old. In my 19 years in the UK I never saw anything like it. Edit: Admittedly I think the constant cloud coverage in the UK was more of a hindrance than the light pollution here I lived. Or at least it was so fucking cloudy so fucking often, I had no idea how bad the light pollution was. I remember when I first moved here and looked up to the sky from my back yard and I could see Orions Belt. Now I'm less than a novice, I only recognised it from Men in Black (don't judge me). But that feeling I had in that moment stuck with me. And I get such a ridiculous glee when I can drive 1-2 hours from Brisbane city and see the most ridiculous night skys I've ever seen. Keep travelling west and it just gets better and better. I can't wait to visit on of the Dark Night Sky locations. NSW, Australia: https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/conservation-and-heritage/our-parks/dark-sky-parks https://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/conservation-and-herita...
  - titzer 6y ago
    Ah man, damn it! I spent 10 months in Australia, but most of it was during lockdown, and I didn't have a car. I only got 1 week of travel and didn't see much of the stars. My best experience was in Fiji and New Zealand, but I imagine that the outback could be even better. I've gone out to Mojave on super clear nights. Vegas is easily visible, almost like a sunrise. The Great Smoky Mountains look good on paper (light pollution map), but in practice they are quite clowdy / hazy, so viewing isn't good. I imagine northern Canada could also be quite good.

phaedrus 6y ago

Something about that Orion photo in particular makes it seem beyond belief that there is not other life around other stars in the galaxy.

quesera 6y ago
For me, it was this image and story that removed any shred of doubt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field The tiny speck of dust that is our whole world is less than a grain of sand on the beaches of the universe. We are not alone. Which doesn't mean that we would want to meet any of our neighbors!
- medstrom 6y ago
  Frankly, since we only have ourselves to sample, we have no idea how large the survivorship bias is. It doesn't matter if there's googol of galaxies or just one galaxy, we have zero direct information on how easily life arises. Putting it another way, observing a googol of galaxies ought to pretty much not at all increase our confidence that other life exists, like how observing a 200% increase in a speed doesn't tell you anything when you don't know what the absolute speed was to start with.
  - TrispusAttucks 6y ago
    You're right in regards to sample size. However, one thing this argument often ignores is that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Life is 3.5 billion years old. The Earth was hot molten rock up until about 20 million years before life began. So we went from Zero to Life in 20 million. Once created it was so successful that it took over nearly every part of the Earth in a multitude of evolving forms. It seems improbable life makes it's appearance so improbably early on Earth that perhaps the only explanation is that life isn't so improbable after all. Perhaps it's even highly likely give the physics of the universe.
  - quesera 6y ago
    This is true, but I don't find it persuasive. We know that simple chemistry plus lots of energy can create more complicated chemistry. We have evidence that some protein molecules can be self-replicating under the right conditions. Given billions of parallel experiments over billions of years, I think it is vanishingly unlikely that exactly one has progressed to the point we would recognize as self-organizing. But that's faith, not proof. I'll defend it as the most reasonable and non-exceptional version of the story, but I won't claim it as absolute truth.