3 ms·

Among my VLBI colleagues, we used to call these things "maps", but now we mostly say "images". "photo", while rare, is not considered wrong.

by wumpus 4y ago

belter 4y ago
The EHT Director during the announcing conference... "...We have seen, and taken a picture, of a Black Hole." Video at the correct time: https://youtu.be/lnJi0Jy692w?t=456 https://youtu.be/lnJi0Jy692w?t=456 Let's not even talk about how it come up with that color, or the fact that in reality there are four different images, corresponding to the different four teams that worked with the same data, and the project then decided to publish only one, "averaged" from the four. ;-)
- wumpus 4y ago
  I'm glad you've read enough to realize how that image was made, but we did publish a lot more than just the one image. The raw data will be published eventually. Thanks for being interested in our data.
  - belter 4y ago
    Sorry if I upset the team. But I don't think it was ok to let the image being published in the front of all newspapers worldwide, and forgot to mention the color comes from the libraries used to compose the "map". It would be equally scientifically correct if you used a blue color or white, since it was a completely arbitrary choice. I know it defeats from the "picture" story, but just was too much overlooking for my taste. I want to see how "creative" the new release will be.
    - wumpus 4y ago
      100% of the details are in the papers.
- _Microft 4y ago
  In my opinion, this makes little sense. The image processing of any digitally taken picture involves so many corrections that these wouldn't pass such a test of "photograph" either. These either happen by choice of the photographer when developing raw images with tools like darktable, Adobe Lightroom, ... because they want to achieve a certain look - or automatically without interaction in your smartphone/DSLR if one is only interested in getting any picture or video out of the other end (remember how iPhones botched the colored sky during the California wildfires because that's something that wasn't foreseen?). Even chemically developing images taken on photographic film gives freedom with the results.

Among my VLBI colleagues, we used to call these things "maps", but now we mostly say "images". "photo", while rare, is not considered wrong.

by wumpus 4y ago

Among my VLBI colleagues, we used to call these things "maps", but now we mostly say "images". "photo", while rare, is not considered wrong.

belter 4y ago

The EHT Director during the announcing conference... "...We have seen, and taken a picture, of a Black Hole." Video at the correct time: https://youtu.be/lnJi0Jy692w?t=456 https://youtu.be/lnJi0Jy692w?t=456 Let's not even talk about how it come up with that color, or the fact that in reality there are four different images, corresponding to the different four teams that worked with the same data, and the project then decided to publish only one, "averaged" from the four. ;-)

wumpus 4y ago
I'm glad you've read enough to realize how that image was made, but we did publish a lot more than just the one image. The raw data will be published eventually. Thanks for being interested in our data.
- belter 4y ago
  Sorry if I upset the team. But I don't think it was ok to let the image being published in the front of all newspapers worldwide, and forgot to mention the color comes from the libraries used to compose the "map". It would be equally scientifically correct if you used a blue color or white, since it was a completely arbitrary choice. I know it defeats from the "picture" story, but just was too much overlooking for my taste. I want to see how "creative" the new release will be.
  - wumpus 4y ago
    100% of the details are in the papers.
_Microft 4y ago
In my opinion, this makes little sense. The image processing of any digitally taken picture involves so many corrections that these wouldn't pass such a test of "photograph" either. These either happen by choice of the photographer when developing raw images with tools like darktable, Adobe Lightroom, ... because they want to achieve a certain look - or automatically without interaction in your smartphone/DSLR if one is only interested in getting any picture or video out of the other end (remember how iPhones botched the colored sky during the California wildfires because that's something that wasn't foreseen?). Even chemically developing images taken on photographic film gives freedom with the results.