3 ms·

So when comparing Webb and Hubble images, we cannot rule out that the colours have been enhanced in post processing and comparisons taken with a grain of salt?

BurningFrog 4y ago
The Webb pics would be invisible to humans without enhancing the colors. Though most things probably look pretty similar in visible light.
- simonh 4y ago
  The main problem with visible light is it's absorbed and scattered by dust. It's Webb's ability to see through all that dust in the IR spectrum that reveals a huge amount of information and images Hubble and our eyes would never be able to see.
biorach 4y ago
Hubble images are also frequently "enhanced". Not all the wavelengths these telescopes capture can be seen by the human eye so some post processing is necessary for the "publicity shots" A lot of the real science is not done visually but by analysing the data
jasonwatkinspdx 4y ago
False color images are common in astronomy as they're working with spectrum ranges wider than our eyes. There's nothing about this that requires a grain of salt style skepticism.
whatshisface 4y ago
There is no naked eye picture to compare it with, so you can't say enhanced. To answer your question, though, the JWST pictures and the Hubble pictures were turned into RGB images in the same way.
- SiempreViernes 4y ago
  > JWST pictures and the Hubble pictures were turned into RGB images in the same way Webb and Hubble have different filters so what does this mean? Did they just take some Webb filters and pretended they where Hubble filters and ran their old code?
  - whatshisface 4y ago
    What I mean is, a telescope will produce several arrays of numbers detailing the number of photons received by each sensor pixel, one array for each frequency it measures. Then you pick three arrays and pack them into a bitmap as the R G and B components. At most you can get fancy by letting it mix three artistically chosen colors (rather than red green and blue), but a lot of pictures don't even involve that. That's the same between Webb, Hubble and any other telescope. Even digital cameras do it - they differ from the human eye, not by a lot but noticeably under some conditions.
8note 4y ago
The colours are arbitrary anyways. Thanks to redshift, they represent distance in time and space away.
- magicalhippo 4y ago
  Though I suppose if one has the distance one could shift back to the color it would be without redshift. Kinda tricky with light from multiple sources in a single pixel of course, and I'm not sure it would be terribly exciting overall. Still, would be interesting I think.
SiempreViernes 4y ago
> we cannot rule out that the colours have been enhanced in post processing The JWST literally cannot take colour images, the colours are entirely a post processing choice. And there really isn't any obvious choice either, I suspect they chose colour values so the end result looks like a Hubble image.

BurningFrog 4y ago

The Webb pics would be invisible to humans without enhancing the colors. Though most things probably look pretty similar in visible light.

simonh 4y ago
The main problem with visible light is it's absorbed and scattered by dust. It's Webb's ability to see through all that dust in the IR spectrum that reveals a huge amount of information and images Hubble and our eyes would never be able to see.

biorach 4y ago

Hubble images are also frequently "enhanced". Not all the wavelengths these telescopes capture can be seen by the human eye so some post processing is necessary for the "publicity shots" A lot of the real science is not done visually but by analysing the data

jasonwatkinspdx 4y ago

False color images are common in astronomy as they're working with spectrum ranges wider than our eyes. There's nothing about this that requires a grain of salt style skepticism.

whatshisface 4y ago

There is no naked eye picture to compare it with, so you can't say enhanced. To answer your question, though, the JWST pictures and the Hubble pictures were turned into RGB images in the same way.

SiempreViernes 4y ago
> JWST pictures and the Hubble pictures were turned into RGB images in the same way Webb and Hubble have different filters so what does this mean? Did they just take some Webb filters and pretended they where Hubble filters and ran their old code?
- whatshisface 4y ago
  What I mean is, a telescope will produce several arrays of numbers detailing the number of photons received by each sensor pixel, one array for each frequency it measures. Then you pick three arrays and pack them into a bitmap as the R G and B components. At most you can get fancy by letting it mix three artistically chosen colors (rather than red green and blue), but a lot of pictures don't even involve that. That's the same between Webb, Hubble and any other telescope. Even digital cameras do it - they differ from the human eye, not by a lot but noticeably under some conditions.

8note 4y ago

The colours are arbitrary anyways. Thanks to redshift, they represent distance in time and space away.

magicalhippo 4y ago
Though I suppose if one has the distance one could shift back to the color it would be without redshift. Kinda tricky with light from multiple sources in a single pixel of course, and I'm not sure it would be terribly exciting overall. Still, would be interesting I think.

SiempreViernes 4y ago

> we cannot rule out that the colours have been enhanced in post processing The JWST literally cannot take colour images, the colours are entirely a post processing choice. And there really isn't any obvious choice either, I suspect they chose colour values so the end result looks like a Hubble image.