2 ms·

Interesting how you can see the chromatic aberration on the bomber but not the ground. I guess that this implies that the optical and/or software correction tha

by qrohlf 5y ago

Interesting how you can see the chromatic aberration on the bomber but not the ground. I guess that this implies that the optical and/or software correction that they're doing only works within a _very_ narrow focal plane, given the relative proximity of the bomber to the ground. This is kind of surprising, because if the tolerances for avoiding chromatic aberration are that small, whatever is collecting this data would have to be constantly adjusting its optics or software based on the topography. EDIT: it's not chromatic aberration, it's pixel misalignment caused by the object being in motion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29627917 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29627917

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
sudoaza 5y ago
I wonder how low it is, found the shadow of it close by 39.02468482732915, -93.6023120071418 https://www.google.com/maps/place/39%C2%B001'28.9%22N+93%C2%B036'08.3%22W/@39.0240473,-93.6064184,1279m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0xd2feed9eacb2542!8m2!3d39.0246848!4d-93.602312 https://www.google.com/maps/place/39%C2%B001'28.9%22N+93%C2%...
- taddeimania 5y ago
  nice catch! I think the altitude could be calculated roughly if we knew the the day of the year the photo was taken.
  - taddeimania 5y ago
    okay so i'm not sure how accurate any of this is since it's overlaying sun angles over a photo that is very likely not taken from a 90deg overhead angle to the bomber... and the scale of the image may be distorted a little... I discovered on google earth that the image was taken May 16th. I used this site http://shadowcalculator.eu/#/lat/39.02397754136213/lng/-93.6001443285912 http://shadowcalculator.eu/#/lat/39.02397754136213/lng/-93.6... to draw a fence around the bomber and defined the "structure" to be an arbitrarily tall height until the sun angle lined up. Then I lowered the height until the sun angle touched the location of the shadow and I came to an altitude of 1100ft / 335.28m (rough height of the "structure")
jpablo 5y ago
This kind of looks like purple fringing but it's not, see other comments saying this is lag in a multi shot image.

by qrohlf 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

sudoaza 5y ago

I wonder how low it is, found the shadow of it close by 39.02468482732915, -93.6023120071418 https://www.google.com/maps/place/39%C2%B001'28.9%22N+93%C2%B036'08.3%22W/@39.0240473,-93.6064184,1279m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0xd2feed9eacb2542!8m2!3d39.0246848!4d-93.602312 https://www.google.com/maps/place/39%C2%B001'28.9%22N+93%C2%...

taddeimania 5y ago
nice catch! I think the altitude could be calculated roughly if we knew the the day of the year the photo was taken.
- taddeimania 5y ago
  okay so i'm not sure how accurate any of this is since it's overlaying sun angles over a photo that is very likely not taken from a 90deg overhead angle to the bomber... and the scale of the image may be distorted a little... I discovered on google earth that the image was taken May 16th. I used this site http://shadowcalculator.eu/#/lat/39.02397754136213/lng/-93.6001443285912 http://shadowcalculator.eu/#/lat/39.02397754136213/lng/-93.6... to draw a fence around the bomber and defined the "structure" to be an arbitrarily tall height until the sun angle lined up. Then I lowered the height until the sun angle touched the location of the shadow and I came to an altitude of 1100ft / 335.28m (rough height of the "structure")

jpablo 5y ago

This kind of looks like purple fringing but it's not, see other comments saying this is lag in a multi shot image.