There is nothing travelling outside our small realm in space. Satellites are in LEO. We have nothing in so called “deep space”. Everything you get back from NASA are composite images. NASA doesn’t produce photos, only images.
Traditional cameras dont work well in space, cosmic radiation being part of it.
Some of the white dots are in places where there are no stars, and there are several sources of the dots. Many of them are from cosmic rays – high energy particles emitted by the Sun, or by distant objects like supernovas or quasars that randomly run into the camera's sensors and light up one or more pixels. When a cosmic ray hits a pixel head-on, it will light up just that pixel. But if it strikes at an angle to the sensor, it can light up a line of pixels, creating a streak in the image. The longest streaks come from cosmic rays that hit the sensors at grazing angles.
They dont take just normal photographs.
Each image is taken with one or more filters positioned in front of the camera sensor. This is similar to how photographers on Earth attach filters to their cameras to achieve special effects in their photos. Another analogy is red and blue lenses in 3D glasses that allow only wavelengths of red or blue light to enter your eyes.
Most digital cameras carried by spacecraft take monochrome images using different color filters, and multiple images can be combined later by scientists on Earth to produce processed image products, including color images. The filters are specially designed to allow only certain wavelengths of light to pass through including red, green, blue, infrared, or ultraviolet. Some cameras also have polarized light filters.
Humans see color in visible light. Consumer digital cameras, including those in smartphones, can take color images meant to capture scenes similar to how we would see them with our eyes. But space imaging cameras are specially designed for science and engineering tasks. They use color filters (also called spectral filters) to reveal how a scene looks in different colors of light. Studying how the Sun, a planet, a moon, asteroid, or comet appears in different colors makes these filters a powerful tool in imaging science.
There are lots of reasons for this but I think the main reason is different elements emit different wavelengths and by using different filters it provides a clue as to what they are looking at.
How Are Images From Space Different Than My Camera's Images?
Images from space missions are a type of scientific, or engineering data. On their simplest level, images are a grid of pixels of varying brightness. The full-quality (archival quality) images scientists and engineers use for their work are uncompressed. This means two things:
Can Raw Images Be Used for Science?
Yes and no. Since some original information is lost during compression, raw images are generally not suitable for detailed scientific analysis, as fine detail and precise pixel measurements matter.
But raw images display a significant amount of detail and provide a useful first look at the image data from a mission, in a way anyone can access. They make it easy to see, at a glance, the abundance of different surface features, and the shapes and structure of features revealed in the images. Trained researchers don't use raw images for detailed scientific measurements, but there's a lot of useful, high-level information in such images that might motivate deeper inquiry.
With all that being said.
It certainly is strange why we dont have a camera on say something like the, Deep Space Climate Observatory. I dont know.
It seems using traditional cameras is not exactly a easy thing. Heres a article where they used glass to protect a very tiny digital camera.
Alongside the satellite, the TRISAT-R team sent up super small cameras made with clear borosilicate glass lenses (a highly durable form of glass) mounted directly onto 320x320 pixel image sensors, according to the statement. That's where we get our wonderfully faulted view.
You could send up a camera sealed in vacumn, but that would be alot of weight I guess.
Right, at least outside the magnetosphere. We used to send film cameras up on massively heavy satellites. Spying purposes, you know. When the film was full, the vessels containing them would be conveyed to a return capsule that detached from the satellite (now worthless) and fell back to Earth to be retrieved and developed.
Transistors did a lot for spaceflight. Specifically: they destroyed human spaceflight.
They never went back because as Don Pettit said "we've lost the technology". Even if NASA can't do it due to financial reasons, Musk wanted to go there but congress barred him. Imagine how many people would be willing to pay for a live feed from the moon - it's a great business model. It makes zero sense not to have missions to the moon for the past 50 years but people believe in ridiculous things especially when they are conditioned since they were little kids. Did you go to space camp?
"we've lost the technology" ... to build a Saturn V. But that's ok, because we wouldn't build another Saturn V, we'd build something better. See SpaceX. Metallurgy, semiconductors, 3D manufacturing methods are all hugely improved from when we built the V.
But you know that, because this isn't an honest conversation. I just wanted to point out the holes in your propaganda for others reading this.
Dude, you're just reinforcing my point - technology has improved drastically in every aspect and everything is a hundred times cheaper and easier to make than back in the 60's and yet there's no mission to the moon. Explain that. I never made the argument the Saturn V tinfoil duct taped junk was the only method to get there so what you're saying makes no sense. What Don Pettit said was they've lost the technology to go to the moon, not the technology to make a Saturn V. Are you telling me Space X doesn't have the technology to go 400 000 km and back when they're preparing for a manned mission to Mars which is 192.87 million km away?
This is a valid argument but you're deflecting because you know there's no good counter to it. The only hole you pointed out is the bottomless pit between your shoulders.
technology has improved drastically in every aspect and everything is a hundred times cheaper and easier to make than back in the 60's and yet there's no mission to the moon.
There have been dozens. Fuck off, paid jewish shill.
Are you telling me Space X doesn't have the technology to go 400 000 km and back when they're preparing for a manned mission to Mars which is 192.87 million km away?
They do. You’re inventing bullshit out of thin air and thinking we can’t take five seconds to prove you wrong.
This is a valid argument
Go back to reddit if you actually believe this.
there's no good counter to it.
How about we make a pact that you toaster bath when Musk lands on the Moon, whereas I’ll do the same when he doesn’t, okay coward?
You have poor comprehension skills. I asked why there was no manned mission to the moon since 1972 and deboonked the stupid excuses given by NASA and their normie fanboys which are 1) we've lost the technology and 2) due to financial reasons.
There have been dozens. Fuck off, paid jewish shill.
Really? Where was the last time people went to the moon?
They do. You’re inventing bullshit out of thin air and thinking we can’t take five seconds to prove you wrong.
That's a rhetorical question - I'm pointing out the contradiction in believing we've lost the technology to go there while there are companies like Space X and while Musk initially wanted to go to the moon but was turned down by congress for no apparent reason.
How about we make a pact that you toaster bath when Musk lands on the Moon, whereas I’ll do the same when he doesn’t, okay coward?
Sure. But I want real and verifiable footage and not some CGI or Kubrick shit.
The last supposed crewed moon landing was Apollo 17 in 1972. Can you read slowboy?
No one cares about your strawman. We’re ignoring it because you’re beneath contempt.
Ad homs and no counters. You're doing a great job. Don Pettit said all there was to it. Or do you prefer Buzz Lightyear telling you what people saw on their TV's back in 1969 was animated?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trY88y1XmTs
You're hanging by the audacious lies of 33 degree freemasons and CIA agencies like NASA (formerly JPL ran by Jack Parsons who was a degenerate Thelemite) and have the gall calling me a jewsh shill. Don't you wonder why your overlords deem moon landing skepticism as "dangerous misinformation" and going against the "science"?
"Muh government is owned by jews and psychopaths who constantly run psy ops and lie just about everything but they definitely won't lie about landing on the moon, dawg." Talk about reddit mentality. You're grotesque. This is what truther brainrot does to people.
There is nothing travelling outside our small realm in space. Satellites are in LEO. We have nothing in so called “deep space”. Everything you get back from NASA are composite images. NASA doesn’t produce photos, only images.
What a meaningless distinction.
Yeah its a technical definition, but it gets the point across does it not?
Weve talked about this before. I try to keep a open mind. I personally believe space exists, or something like space anyway.
Here sounds like a reasonable explanation.
https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/multimedia/raw-images-faq/
There are lots of reasons for this but I think the main reason is different elements emit different wavelengths and by using different filters it provides a clue as to what they are looking at.
With all that being said.
It certainly is strange why we dont have a camera on say something like the, Deep Space Climate Observatory. I dont know.
It seems using traditional cameras is not exactly a easy thing. Heres a article where they used glass to protect a very tiny digital camera.
https://www.space.com/trisatr-satellites-earth-image-space-camera
You could send up a camera sealed in vacumn, but that would be alot of weight I guess.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-first-spy-satellites-had-to-drop-gigantic-buckets-of-film-back-to-earth/
:shrugs:
Right, at least outside the magnetosphere. We used to send film cameras up on massively heavy satellites. Spying purposes, you know. When the film was full, the vessels containing them would be conveyed to a return capsule that detached from the satellite (now worthless) and fell back to Earth to be retrieved and developed.
Transistors did a lot for spaceflight. Specifically: they destroyed human spaceflight.
"massively heavy satellites" = balloons
Back to the Qult board with you, degenerate. You have no place here.
say the guy whos never made a post lmao
Burn in hell, you fucking paid shill. We will never fall for your well poisoning hoaxes.
NASA is fake and gay. I'm still waiting for the live feed from the moon but they can't even get there.
Anyone have a link for the cams orbiting the Moon?
I'll watch that feed til I find the other one.
Why do you think such cameras exist? Fuck off with the well poisoning.
They are artistic depictions
Moon landing hoaxers are a mossad psyop.
Jews are jealous whites were able to do something they could never do.
They never went back because as Don Pettit said "we've lost the technology". Even if NASA can't do it due to financial reasons, Musk wanted to go there but congress barred him. Imagine how many people would be willing to pay for a live feed from the moon - it's a great business model. It makes zero sense not to have missions to the moon for the past 50 years but people believe in ridiculous things especially when they are conditioned since they were little kids. Did you go to space camp?
"we've lost the technology" ... to build a Saturn V. But that's ok, because we wouldn't build another Saturn V, we'd build something better. See SpaceX. Metallurgy, semiconductors, 3D manufacturing methods are all hugely improved from when we built the V.
But you know that, because this isn't an honest conversation. I just wanted to point out the holes in your propaganda for others reading this.
Dude, you're just reinforcing my point - technology has improved drastically in every aspect and everything is a hundred times cheaper and easier to make than back in the 60's and yet there's no mission to the moon. Explain that. I never made the argument the Saturn V tinfoil duct taped junk was the only method to get there so what you're saying makes no sense. What Don Pettit said was they've lost the technology to go to the moon, not the technology to make a Saturn V. Are you telling me Space X doesn't have the technology to go 400 000 km and back when they're preparing for a manned mission to Mars which is 192.87 million km away?
This is a valid argument but you're deflecting because you know there's no good counter to it. The only hole you pointed out is the bottomless pit between your shoulders.
You don’t have one.
There have been dozens. Fuck off, paid jewish shill.
They do. You’re inventing bullshit out of thin air and thinking we can’t take five seconds to prove you wrong.
Go back to reddit if you actually believe this.
How about we make a pact that you toaster bath when Musk lands on the Moon, whereas I’ll do the same when he doesn’t, okay coward?
Here comes the sperg idiot to the rescue.
You have poor comprehension skills. I asked why there was no manned mission to the moon since 1972 and deboonked the stupid excuses given by NASA and their normie fanboys which are 1) we've lost the technology and 2) due to financial reasons.
Really? Where was the last time people went to the moon?
That's a rhetorical question - I'm pointing out the contradiction in believing we've lost the technology to go there while there are companies like Space X and while Musk initially wanted to go to the moon but was turned down by congress for no apparent reason.
Sure. But I want real and verifiable footage and not some CGI or Kubrick shit.
What happened in 1971, dumb fuck?
Literally didn’t happen. Learn how to spell.
Fuck off, zero effort paid shill.
It’s not a question, you incomprehensibly retarded bot.
No one cares about your strawman. We’re ignoring it because you’re beneath contempt.
Didn’t happen. Go fuck yourself, you retarded sack of shit.
You tell me.
The last supposed crewed moon landing was Apollo 17 in 1972. Can you read slowboy?
Ad homs and no counters. You're doing a great job. Don Pettit said all there was to it. Or do you prefer Buzz Lightyear telling you what people saw on their TV's back in 1969 was animated? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trY88y1XmTs
You're hanging by the audacious lies of 33 degree freemasons and CIA agencies like NASA (formerly JPL ran by Jack Parsons who was a degenerate Thelemite) and have the gall calling me a jewsh shill. Don't you wonder why your overlords deem moon landing skepticism as "dangerous misinformation" and going against the "science"?
"Muh government is owned by jews and psychopaths who constantly run psy ops and lie just about everything but they definitely won't lie about landing on the moon, dawg." Talk about reddit mentality. You're grotesque. This is what truther brainrot does to people.
https://time.com/5628572/elon-musk-moon-landing/
Just 2 more years to slow the spread. Yeah, it's not happening.
Everything you spam here is a lie.