3 ms·

I think JWST will be an amazing replacement as most space photos are doctored with visible light "interpretations" of other wavelengths already and nobody seems

I think JWST will be an amazing replacement as most space photos are doctored with visible light "interpretations" of other wavelengths already and nobody seems to notice/care as they have their minds blown. The process almost even adds to the beauty of them.

kunai 5y ago
That's a good point. Regardless of how it shakes out, I'm really excited to see the first images from Webb. The implications this spacecraft could have for understanding the question of where we came from are immense.
leephillips 5y ago
How do you visualize non-visible wavelengths except by using visible wavelengths? I mean, for humans.
- Qub3d 5y ago
  You basically use a mapping function that assigns a visible wavelength to a corresponding non-visible one. Its as if you're manually red-shifting the light "down" the spectrum.
  - leephillips 5y ago
    What will they think of next?
Eelongate 5y ago
>nobody seems to notice/care as they have their minds blown Some people do, and erroneously conclude that "space is fake". This would be laughable, if not for the part where they then persuade their friends and family to feel deceived. Artificially coloring images without disclosing it clearly upfront in a highly visible manner, ideally with some sort of watermark on the image, is the sort of white lie that contributes to the public's growing distrust of authority. Yes, I know the caption below the image usually disclaims it. But as you say, most people don't notice or know it until somebody points it out to them, and too often the somebody who points it out is somebody who's peddling nonsense of their own.
mnw21cam 5y ago
Calling it "doctored" is perhaps a stretch. Hubble (and many earth-bound astronomers) take images of emission nebulae with narrowband filters covering some of the emission lines that are important and particularly strong. The typical ones are hydrogen-alpha, oxygen-III, and sulphur-II. These are particular colours of light that are emitted by these chemical elements, and so detecting these emissions are the best way to detect these chemical elements, for science. Then these detections are put together into a false-colour image so we can visualise it. We have three narrowband filters, so it makes obvious sense to map them to the three primary colours in the image. It's not about using weird filters on the telescope to make "doctored" images that look impressive. It's about using weird filters on the telescope to collect the best science possible, and then using that data to make an image.

kunai 5y ago

That's a good point. Regardless of how it shakes out, I'm really excited to see the first images from Webb. The implications this spacecraft could have for understanding the question of where we came from are immense.

leephillips 5y ago

How do you visualize non-visible wavelengths except by using visible wavelengths? I mean, for humans.

Qub3d 5y ago
You basically use a mapping function that assigns a visible wavelength to a corresponding non-visible one. Its as if you're manually red-shifting the light "down" the spectrum.
- leephillips 5y ago
  What will they think of next?

Eelongate 5y ago

>nobody seems to notice/care as they have their minds blown Some people do, and erroneously conclude that "space is fake". This would be laughable, if not for the part where they then persuade their friends and family to feel deceived. Artificially coloring images without disclosing it clearly upfront in a highly visible manner, ideally with some sort of watermark on the image, is the sort of white lie that contributes to the public's growing distrust of authority. Yes, I know the caption below the image usually disclaims it. But as you say, most people don't notice or know it until somebody points it out to them, and too often the somebody who points it out is somebody who's peddling nonsense of their own.

mnw21cam 5y ago

Calling it "doctored" is perhaps a stretch. Hubble (and many earth-bound astronomers) take images of emission nebulae with narrowband filters covering some of the emission lines that are important and particularly strong. The typical ones are hydrogen-alpha, oxygen-III, and sulphur-II. These are particular colours of light that are emitted by these chemical elements, and so detecting these emissions are the best way to detect these chemical elements, for science. Then these detections are put together into a false-colour image so we can visualise it. We have three narrowband filters, so it makes obvious sense to map them to the three primary colours in the image. It's not about using weird filters on the telescope to make "doctored" images that look impressive. It's about using weird filters on the telescope to collect the best science possible, and then using that data to make an image.