4 ms·
From satellites? I find that hard to believe, I always thought that the atmospheric distortion significantly limits the resolution of the images.
by jtwaleson 3y ago
From satellites? I find that hard to believe, I always thought that the atmospheric distortion significantly limits the resolution of the images.
- selectodude 3y agoThat picture that Donald Trump tweeted out of the failed Iranian rocket launch seemed sharp enough to make out license plates. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1167493371973255170 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/11674933719732551...
- jtwaleson 3y agoThat structure seems really large. But it’s really sharp and I’d say within an order of magnitude of reading license plates. Doesn’t seem like a stretch to think they can go to higher resolutions.
- justrealist 3y agoThis seems like maybe 10cm resolution. Close but not there.
- mannyv 3y agoThat's why it was classified. Belief is irrelevant. You can lookup keyhole imagery from the old days. Keyhole was the original codename for them.
- m4rtink 3y agoAstronomical telescopes use active mirrors for atmosphere compensations - maybe a satellite could do the same to get a clearer image, just pointing the other direction ?
- acdha 3y agoIt does, but it’s the kind of problem you can throw computation at, along with adaptive optics. If you remember that photo Trump released, that was from a KH-11, which launched in the 70s (Hubble reused some of the design to save money) and they it generating data in the gigabit range back then so I’d imagine they have a high enough frame rate that you could get many frames to interpolate even for a moving subject. They pour a LOT of money into that kind of capability so I’d be hesitant to say it’s impossible 50 years later.