7 ms·

At this point in history, with the economies of scale in production from phones etc, surely it's cheaper to put in a colour camera?!

hanniabu 3y ago
The conditions it's operating under and level of reliability needed are completely different
kataklasm 3y ago
Modern day tech often reaches spaceflight circles decades after it becomes ubiquitous in normal use. For spaceflight purposes it is extremely vital that any and all components and tech is matured amd that takes a long time. Add in a ton of certification and paperwork processes and there you go.
- verisimi 3y ago
  You don't think colour photography is mature? And even if that were the case, do you not think there would be some scientific value to having the photo in colour that it would be worth the risk? Personally - I think its ridiculous that NASA get so many billions but are unable to put in a decent colour camera. I can't see any acceptable reason for this. PS first colour photo was in 1890. PPS I mean 1861! https://www.bbc.com/news/13411083 https://www.bbc.com/news/13411083
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    The probe's purpose is not to determine the color of the sun; we are readily capable of doing that from here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Solar_Probe#Instruments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Solar_Probe#Instruments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WISPR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WISPR
  - mcbutterbunz 3y ago
    In addition to all the other replies on this topic, monochrome sensors are capable of higher detail and higher sensitivity than color sensors. There's no scientific benefit to using a color sensor. In fact, a color sensor would be detrimental.
    - kryptiskt 3y ago
      Yes, no professional telescope uses a color sensor, because the on-chip filters on those are terrible and doesn't go away when you don't want color. All color images are either done by combining images with different filters or are false color images.
  - tekla 3y ago
    Only on HN do we find so many people that have so much high regard of their own intellect over a army of Engineers.
    - verisimi 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - schoen 3y ago
        Here's an article by the scientists who created the camera that took this picture, introducing it and describing its design. https://orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/200751/1/The%20Wide-Field%20Imager%20for%20Solar%20Probe%20Plus%20%28WISPR%29.pdf https://orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/200751/1/The%20Wide-Fi... It's very much not an off-the-shelf camera; it seems to have involved years of custom engineering work. This article doesn't seem to address the specific question of "why is this camera monochrome?" but you can see that it wasn't trivial to make an instrument that would work well in this difficult environment. So it's definitely not like "and let's throw a commercial digital camera on there too just for fun!". It's a legitimate question why some kind of color camera wasn't considered worth including, but lots of space missions have sensors that are something other than a simulacrum of human vision. That's why so many astronomical images end up getting published in false color. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_color https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_color In almost all of those cases, the justification for the false color seems to be some form of "true color wouldn't have been possible or appropriate for the scientific purposes of this imagery".
        verisimi 3y ago
        Thank you for acknowledging this is a legitimate question. I've no issue with all sorts of cameras and scientific instruments being placed on a space craft. I don't expect to get access to all the data that is sent back - though - as it is from the public purse - I think it should be made available. My point is that the only interaction us great unwashed have with these missions is with the imagery that is provided.. How difficult would it be to have a colour camera?!?! I have a crap mobile and it has 3 cameras! And one on the front! When colour cameras have been available to everyone for so long, its simply inconceivable that NASA can never provide decent imagery! Its 2024 ffs, surely we can have colour by now! No? If not now, when?
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  > For spaceflight purposes it is extremely vital that any and all components and tech is matured It's not "extremely vital", it's just how NASA has been doing things for a good while. Sometimes ultra perfectionism makes sense. Sometimes you can aim for an 85% mission success rate and launch 5 probes for half the price a decade earlier.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    > Sometimes you can aim for an 85% mission success rate and launch 5 probes for half the price a decade earlier. …Which NASA also does. That’s the helicopter on Mars, and the first Starship mission. Which 85% success rate space mission did you pull off?
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      > …Which NASA also does. That’s the helicopter on Mars So you agree with me that it's viable, great. I guess I should have been more clear that the perfectionism is how NASA almost always operates these days. > the first Starship mission. Not NASA. > Which 85% success rate space mission did you pull off? What's with this hostility? All I said is that it's not extremely vital. I didn't even say NASA definitely did anything wrong, just that there are options.
- mulmen 3y ago
  I disagree. There’s an enormous amount of bleeding edge tech in spacecraft. This camera was a totally custom thing. The constraints are simply so limiting that we have to make tradeoffs.
elorant 3y ago
The camera has to be shielded against various forms of radiation that are emitted from the Sun and that could be a limiting factor for its capabilities.
- verisimi 3y ago
  [flagged]
mulmen 3y ago
“Cheap” and “first in human history” rarely go together. When Apple offers a mass produced solar probe I’m sure it will have a color camera. Until then you have to be satisfied by the actual achievement instead.
- verisimi 3y ago
  We can send probes to the sun, to Mars, collect samples from asteroids billions of miles away.... but we can't get decent quality colour photos?!? That tech is beyond us? In 2024? .. wtf ... I really don't get why my original post is downvoted and being disputed. It seems such a basic point.. It such an oversight on the part of NASA, it borders on intentional.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    > It such an oversight on the part of NASA, it borders on intentional. This is why you are being downvoted. You clearly do not understand the difficulty of these achievements. Yet you claim NASA is incompetent for doing something literally nobody has ever done before. A color camera has no scientific value so they didn’t send one. It’s that simple. Assuming you know more than NASA is rightfully going to earn downvotes. You don’t know more than NASA. Approach this with an open mind and some curiosity and you’ll get a much warmer response. You might even learn something.
    - verisimi 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - mulmen 3y ago
        We already know what color the sun is. Color cameras take worse quality images and use more data to do so. The black and white images are higher fidelity and thus convey more useful information. > You are telling me that using your visual sense is irrelevant, because of all the data that is being collected. I’m not telling you that. Black and white pictures are still perceived with the visual sense. The picture is data. > Ie scientists like spreadsheets of info, databases, rather than imagery that is faithful to the human eye. Well, no, clearly they value images because they sent a camera. A human eye would be completely obliterated way before reaching the sun’s corona. It’s physically impossible for a person to perceive this environment “faithfully”. > everyone who can use their eyes to judge information will do so Yes but there is less useful information in a color image to judge. > you can do both cos the overhead of a colour camera is so low! The overhead for a useless instrument is extremely high. There are mass constraints, power constraints, and communication bandwidth constraints. A color camera would be a pointless waste of resources.

hanniabu 3y ago

The conditions it's operating under and level of reliability needed are completely different

kataklasm 3y ago

Modern day tech often reaches spaceflight circles decades after it becomes ubiquitous in normal use. For spaceflight purposes it is extremely vital that any and all components and tech is matured amd that takes a long time. Add in a ton of certification and paperwork processes and there you go.

verisimi 3y ago
You don't think colour photography is mature? And even if that were the case, do you not think there would be some scientific value to having the photo in colour that it would be worth the risk? Personally - I think its ridiculous that NASA get so many billions but are unable to put in a decent colour camera. I can't see any acceptable reason for this. PS first colour photo was in 1890. PPS I mean 1861! https://www.bbc.com/news/13411083 https://www.bbc.com/news/13411083
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  The probe's purpose is not to determine the color of the sun; we are readily capable of doing that from here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Solar_Probe#Instruments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Solar_Probe#Instruments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WISPR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WISPR
- mcbutterbunz 3y ago
  In addition to all the other replies on this topic, monochrome sensors are capable of higher detail and higher sensitivity than color sensors. There's no scientific benefit to using a color sensor. In fact, a color sensor would be detrimental.
  - kryptiskt 3y ago
    Yes, no professional telescope uses a color sensor, because the on-chip filters on those are terrible and doesn't go away when you don't want color. All color images are either done by combining images with different filters or are false color images.
- tekla 3y ago
  Only on HN do we find so many people that have so much high regard of their own intellect over a army of Engineers.
  - verisimi 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - schoen 3y ago
      Here's an article by the scientists who created the camera that took this picture, introducing it and describing its design. https://orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/200751/1/The%20Wide-Field%20Imager%20for%20Solar%20Probe%20Plus%20%28WISPR%29.pdf https://orbi.uliege.be/bitstream/2268/200751/1/The%20Wide-Fi... It's very much not an off-the-shelf camera; it seems to have involved years of custom engineering work. This article doesn't seem to address the specific question of "why is this camera monochrome?" but you can see that it wasn't trivial to make an instrument that would work well in this difficult environment. So it's definitely not like "and let's throw a commercial digital camera on there too just for fun!". It's a legitimate question why some kind of color camera wasn't considered worth including, but lots of space missions have sensors that are something other than a simulacrum of human vision. That's why so many astronomical images end up getting published in false color. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_color https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_color In almost all of those cases, the justification for the false color seems to be some form of "true color wouldn't have been possible or appropriate for the scientific purposes of this imagery".
      - verisimi 3y ago
        Thank you for acknowledging this is a legitimate question. I've no issue with all sorts of cameras and scientific instruments being placed on a space craft. I don't expect to get access to all the data that is sent back - though - as it is from the public purse - I think it should be made available. My point is that the only interaction us great unwashed have with these missions is with the imagery that is provided.. How difficult would it be to have a colour camera?!?! I have a crap mobile and it has 3 cameras! And one on the front! When colour cameras have been available to everyone for so long, its simply inconceivable that NASA can never provide decent imagery! Its 2024 ffs, surely we can have colour by now! No? If not now, when?
Dylan16807 3y ago
> For spaceflight purposes it is extremely vital that any and all components and tech is matured It's not "extremely vital", it's just how NASA has been doing things for a good while. Sometimes ultra perfectionism makes sense. Sometimes you can aim for an 85% mission success rate and launch 5 probes for half the price a decade earlier.
- mulmen 3y ago
  > Sometimes you can aim for an 85% mission success rate and launch 5 probes for half the price a decade earlier. …Which NASA also does. That’s the helicopter on Mars, and the first Starship mission. Which 85% success rate space mission did you pull off?
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    > …Which NASA also does. That’s the helicopter on Mars So you agree with me that it's viable, great. I guess I should have been more clear that the perfectionism is how NASA almost always operates these days. > the first Starship mission. Not NASA. > Which 85% success rate space mission did you pull off? What's with this hostility? All I said is that it's not extremely vital. I didn't even say NASA definitely did anything wrong, just that there are options.
mulmen 3y ago
I disagree. There’s an enormous amount of bleeding edge tech in spacecraft. This camera was a totally custom thing. The constraints are simply so limiting that we have to make tradeoffs.

elorant 3y ago

The camera has to be shielded against various forms of radiation that are emitted from the Sun and that could be a limiting factor for its capabilities.

verisimi 3y ago
[flagged]

mulmen 3y ago

“Cheap” and “first in human history” rarely go together. When Apple offers a mass produced solar probe I’m sure it will have a color camera. Until then you have to be satisfied by the actual achievement instead.

verisimi 3y ago
We can send probes to the sun, to Mars, collect samples from asteroids billions of miles away.... but we can't get decent quality colour photos?!? That tech is beyond us? In 2024? .. wtf ... I really don't get why my original post is downvoted and being disputed. It seems such a basic point.. It such an oversight on the part of NASA, it borders on intentional.
- mulmen 3y ago
  > It such an oversight on the part of NASA, it borders on intentional. This is why you are being downvoted. You clearly do not understand the difficulty of these achievements. Yet you claim NASA is incompetent for doing something literally nobody has ever done before. A color camera has no scientific value so they didn’t send one. It’s that simple. Assuming you know more than NASA is rightfully going to earn downvotes. You don’t know more than NASA. Approach this with an open mind and some curiosity and you’ll get a much warmer response. You might even learn something.
  - verisimi 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - mulmen 3y ago
      We already know what color the sun is. Color cameras take worse quality images and use more data to do so. The black and white images are higher fidelity and thus convey more useful information. > You are telling me that using your visual sense is irrelevant, because of all the data that is being collected. I’m not telling you that. Black and white pictures are still perceived with the visual sense. The picture is data. > Ie scientists like spreadsheets of info, databases, rather than imagery that is faithful to the human eye. Well, no, clearly they value images because they sent a camera. A human eye would be completely obliterated way before reaching the sun’s corona. It’s physically impossible for a person to perceive this environment “faithfully”. > everyone who can use their eyes to judge information will do so Yes but there is less useful information in a color image to judge. > you can do both cos the overhead of a colour camera is so low! The overhead for a useless instrument is extremely high. There are mass constraints, power constraints, and communication bandwidth constraints. A color camera would be a pointless waste of resources.