Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Sci-Tech Universe] NASA's 1 Billion Dollar Jupiter Probe Just Sent Back Stunning New Photos of Jupiter
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Sci-Tech Universe] NASA's 1 Billion Dollar Jupiter Probe Just Sent Back Stunning New Photos of Jupiter - Page 14

post #131 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

I know it. It's tragically underfunded, which is what I was trying to say (albeit more opaquely).

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrews2547 View Post

It sort of is.

Sorry couldn't help it, your avatars express my reply well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mmonnin View Post

Does the p900 work at near absolute zero in intense radiation?
It's just a lens and tiny sensor that makes the camera popular.

Images are edited, always, stitched together, transferred in various pieces, qualities, sometimes black-white only too. Then people go, blow out the contrast to insane value so they can see details at all and color it to their liking, so no wonder people think it's CGI when most of it is photoshoped so one can see anything in otherwise very bland photo. Look up the source images people, not artist renderings. It was the same with Mars photos, some were not even stitched and I had to make panoramas myself.

Are they gonna crash land it at the end and try get data from closer or it will just die later doing what ever else, I didn't check the mission plan, only briefly and they didn't show what they plan to do after a few orbits/passes.
post #132 of 161
It'll will crash into Jupiter like Cassini did with Saturn to keep any possible human contamination away from Jupiter's moons.
post #133 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackCY View Post

Sorry couldn't help it, your avatars express my reply well.

Images are edited, always, stitched together, transferred in various pieces, qualities, sometimes black-white only too. Then people go, blow out the contrast to insane value so they can see details at all and color it to their liking, so no wonder people think it's CGI when most of it is photoshoped so one can see anything in otherwise very bland photo. Look up the source images people, not artist renderings. It was the same with Mars photos, some were not even stitched and I had to make panoramas myself.

 

NASA's budget is usually about half a percent of the total US federal budget. Given that no matter how well we act as stewards of the Earth it will eventually be destroyed, I feel like it gets less budgetary love than its mission warrants. That's not even getting into the potential resources accessible in even our solar system, as well as the potential for advancements in energy technology (solar research and space research go hand-in-hand). It's certainly more worthy of additional funding (in my opinion) than making the US Navy even more biglier than every other world navy or some such.

 

If people are dense enough to cry CGI because photos are adjusted to better portray the features for which they were taken, no amount of logic or sound explanation will change their minds. I mean, David Icke still makes money. Case closed. That said, the source images are always available, so I don't see the issue. If you want the unfiltered images, they are there for the taking. Touching them up makes them more accessible to the average jagoff, which is crucial to NASA's funding, bringing us full circle.

 

 

This doesn't really capture the majesty of Jupiter, or space in general.


Edited by SuperZan - 11/13/17 at 7:44pm
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 7 1700X @ 4.0 GHz 1.37v o/s  Biostar X370 GT7 Sapphire Radeon RX Vega 64 8GB HBM2 G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) @ 32... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Biostar M200-240 240GB m.2 SATA SSD (Win) Samsung 850 Pro 256GB SSD (Linux) SanDisk Ultra II 480GB SSD (Games) Seagate 2TB SSHD (Storage) 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
LG DVD RW Swiftech H220-X2 Swiftech Komodo RX-ECO Vega Water Block XSPC EX240 Rad 
CoolingOSOSMonitor
Gentle Typhoon 120mm x4 Ubuntu 17.10 w/ custom kernel Windows 10 Pro Pixio PX277 27" 1440p 144Hz DP-Adaptive Sync w... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
JAR-OWL J1 Rainbow LED Mechanical SeaSonic X-Series 1050w Gold+ Corsair 760T Zowie FK1 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Razer Firefly Plantronics Rig 500e Gaming Headset Marantz Pro MPH-1 Monitoring Headphones S.M.S.L SD-793II Audio DAC + Headphone Amplifier 
Other
Xbox One Controller 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-4790k @ 4.6GHz Asrock Z97 Extreme6 EVGA GTX 1070 SC Corsair Vengeance 16GB (2x8GB) @ 2133 10-10-10-... 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 530 Series 480GB SSD Seagate 2TB SSHD LG DVD RW Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 10 40" Vizio HDTV HP Generic EVGA SuperNOVA NEX 650w 
CaseMouseAudio
Corsair Carbide 300R Logitech Generic HyperX Cloud 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-6300 @ 4.3GHz 1.35v Biostar TA970 v5.3 MSI HD 6950 2GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z 16GB (4x4GB) 1600 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Cryorig H5 Ultimate Corsair AF120 (White LED) x3 Corsair AF140 (White LED) x2 Windows 10 Pro 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dell S2440L Microsoft Ergonomic 4000 EVGA B2 850w Corsair 300R 
Mouse
SteelSeries Rival 300 
  hide details  
Reply
post #134 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

NASA's budget is usually about half a percent of the total US federal budget. Given that no matter how well we act as stewards of the Earth it will eventually be destroyed, I feel like it gets less budgetary love than its mission warrants. That's not even getting into the potential resources accessible in even our solar system, as well as the potential for advancements in energy technology (solar research and space research go hand-in-hand). It's certainly more worthy of additional funding (in my opinion) than making the US Navy even more biglier than every other world navy or some such.

If people are dense enough to cry CGI because photos are adjusted to better portray the features for which they were taken, no amount of logic or sound explanation will change their minds. I mean, David Icke still makes money. Case closed. That said, the source images are always available, so I don't see the issue. If you want the unfiltered images, they are there for the taking. Touching them up makes them more accessible to the average jagoff, which is crucial to NASA's funding, bringing us full circle.




This doesn't really capture the majesty of Jupiter, or space in general.

Agreed, and you can easily tell that its the same image, just more colorful and contrasty. No idea where this idea that ILM was contracted to create these images like in a ST film came from?
post #135 of 161
Goodness, if those images are fake, so are any colored images from 1860s.
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(179 photos)
 
Reply
Workstation stuff
(407 photos)
SpecViewperf 12.0.1
(179 photos)
 
Reply
post #136 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by killer_bee View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Majin SSJ Eric View Post

That's just it, the fallacy in this thread is that those images are "fake" in the first place. They are obviously highly edited for effect, but they are still 100% REAL photos. You can see from the raw photos posted earlier that these prettier images were simply edited for color, saturation, contrast, etc but the actual realness of the images is not in question, any more than photos you take with a point and shoot are still real images even when you go into PS and edit them to make them look more visually pleasing. These are just ENHANCED images, not wholesale fake renders or anything like that...
See above; they are NOT CGI.

a $600 camera (p900) can take a full zoom shot of the moon. you can see all the cracks, crevices, craters on the moon. you can tell it's a real image. these jupiter images you can clearly tell they are not real, and just cgi images. with a billion dollar technology, all we get are blurry shots that have to be edited? who do we need to fire at NASA.....

It's not just a Camera. Please go back to my earlier post. The thing weighs 1.5 tons, had to travel 2.8 billion kilometers and is expected to rotate Jupiter 37 times, survive radiation from the Sun, learn what Jupiter is made of. Yeah, good luck with your 600 dollar camera thumb.gif These images are enhanced and not fake.
post #137 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by killer_bee View Post

a $600 camera (p900) can take a full zoom shot of the moon. you can see all the cracks, crevices, craters on the moon. you can tell it's a real image. these jupiter images you can clearly tell they are not real, and just cgi images. with a billion dollar technology, all we get are blurry shots that have to be edited? who do we need to fire at NASA.....

Why are you a member of a technology forum if you have no idea and are unwilling to learn how important aspects of the technology and techniques surrounding space imagery?
post #138 of 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperZan View Post

NASA's budget is usually about half a percent of the total US federal budget. Given that no matter how well we act as stewards of the Earth it will eventually be destroyed, I feel like it gets less budgetary love than its mission warrants. That's not even getting into the potential resources accessible in even our solar system, as well as the potential for advancements in energy technology (solar research and space research go hand-in-hand). It's certainly more worthy of additional funding (in my opinion) than making the US Navy even more biglier than every other world navy or some such.

If people are dense enough to cry CGI because photos are adjusted to better portray the features for which they were taken, no amount of logic or sound explanation will change their minds. I mean, David Icke still makes money. Case closed. That said, the source images are always available, so I don't see the issue. If you want the unfiltered images, they are there for the taking. Touching them up makes them more accessible to the average jagoff, which is crucial to NASA's funding, bringing us full circle.




This doesn't really capture the majesty of Jupiter, or space in general.

Boosting the colors really helps. Look at how much detail there is. Color boosted 1000%. Artist depiction.


Normal Jupiter (quoted) vs. rainbow Jupiter (above)

By playing with the luminosity and color curves we can see exaggerated colors without the overblown colors of Rainbow Jupiter.


Edited by aweir - 11/14/17 at 3:01pm
post #139 of 161
lol CGI? like the rest of the "photos" from other planets
post #140 of 161
This could shed some light on some of the arguments made in this thread. When I was a student at Cal Poly Pomona, we had many professors and faculty who worked on the equipment that went into space (they worked at JPL). People who've worked on the deep space satellites told me that they only used components that were 10 years old at the very least, because they were "tried and true". Engineers at JPL were required to use components that had a guaranteed 10 year life span for mission critical components. Not only that, but for the Jupiter missions, the radiation levels are extremely high (no seriously), and it was critical to protect the components onboard the spacecraft. It is risky to send new technology into space due to the lack of relevant data on said technology, and in space things could be flying for years.

One particular sentiment that one of my professors kept repeating was that many people who haven't worked on spacecraft don't truly understand the component selection process of spacecraft. One particular example in component selection would be transistors. Nowadays we use MOSFETs everywhere, because of their high flexibility and relatively high power applications, but MOSFETs are terrible in space due to how sensitive they are to radiation. He told us that MOSFETs would last no longer than half a year before going bad, while traditional transistors such as BJTs would last years.

This brings us back to the original point. Juno was launched in 2011, which means that mission critical components (the camera would be mission critical if it's purpose was reconnaissance), would be using technology from the early 2000's or even the 90's. Obviously, cameras have come a long way from the 90's and early 2000's.

Here's a good read that provides background information as well as relevant information on MOSFETs in space. Fuji Electric Vol. 56 No. 2. It explains the physics behind high energy interference on MOSFETs in space. also note that this was released in 2010, only a year before Juno was launched. At this point in time, these new space-faring MOSFETs would still be considered experimental technology.

http://www.fujielectric.com/company/tech_archives/review_56.html
Edited by Meisgoot312 - 11/14/17 at 10:59pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Sci-Tech Universe] NASA's 1 Billion Dollar Jupiter Probe Just Sent Back Stunning New Photos of Jupiter