Funny, Strange, Random Pics

[Kolle]

Originally Posted by Algrinon

Men never walked on the moon and aliens landed in Roswell, too.

Yeah no one in government lies or covers up the truth either.

[Big W Powah!]

Originally Posted by Zistrix

Yes there are a goldmine of beautiful images. However, NASA has been responsible for 95% of computer raster technology. Even adobe photoshops core is based on mostly nasa pixel technology.

What does this all mean? It means that NASA has been photoshopping images since the invention of computers. And they do it for 2 reasons: 1. To improve the quality of the images for analysis and other science-related research 2. To release more dramatic images to the public to ensure continued funding

So, don't assume that "what you see is what you get" when it comes from NASA

So let me get this straight. NASA pretties up fucking pictures taken in space? OH MY FUCKING GOD CALL THE CI FUCKING A! BITCHES CONSPIRING MOTHERFUCKERS!


Fuck man, the hubble is the fucking WMD of space, bitches...




Seriously, sir, you need to get a grip on fucking reality. THIS--ISN'T--FUCKING--NEWSWORTHY.

[Yermum Onceme]

he just posted an fyi that the pictures were more than likely touched up and not authentic.

YOU flipped out, big fucking w

[TheOkapi]

Less chat, more pics.

[Big W Powah!]

Originally Posted by Yermum Onceme

he just posted an fyi that the pictures were more than likely touched up and not authentic.

YOU flipped out, big fucking w

k. I care what you fucking think why? "What you see is not always what you get" isn't an interesting tidbit, IMHO.

[Lejina Bloodbath]

Yah, they shouldn't touch up the pictures at all.

I mean, it's obviously bullshit that they change the colors of the stars and shit, while they could keep them in those nice tones of infrared and ultraviolet and other invisible frequencies.

Ok, all we would see would be pitch black pictures of nothing, but at least that would be the truth!

Dumbass.

[Eomer]

I do think they should make a better effort to explain to people that most of the most famous pictures from astronomy (Fountains of Creation) are not actually "real" pictures. But yeah, breaking news fo sho.

[Borzak]

They are "real" pictures. Most of the great shots you see were taking with "real" cameras and not computer enhanced. They do use special filters and lenses and incredibly long exposure times that are not possible on earth.

I've done a little astro photography and you use a guide star to make sure what your taking a picture of stays centered as the earth rotates (sometimes for hours)...even tho you might not even can see what your taking a pic of...but in space the hubble has no such limitatons.

You can get some incredible photogrpahs similar to hubble from earth with a regular telescope and the right exposures/lenses/filters...but obviously hubble gets a lot more of them.

I don't know how you can not call it a real photograph, the camera took a picture of what exactly was coming into it's lens - tho it might have been filtered etc... first. Would you say a pic was not real if taken with sunshade or a zoom lens? Of course not.

[Eomer]

But often they're not representative of what the object would really look like. As others have said, sometimes the "pictures" were taken at IR or UV wavelengths, and then converted to visible light for a human to actually be able to view. If you went halfway across the galaxy and actually looked at the object the picture was taken of, it would look completely different when viewing the actual visible light.

And furthermore, a lot of pictures aren't even of IR or UV light, but rather concentrations of different elements, or different proportions of isotypes of hydrogen, or temperature fluctuations and so on. All things that are not "real" when talking about what a human would actually see.

[Tea on tuesday]

It's not like NASA ever tried to hide or cover up the fact the pictures weren't "true to life" anyway. Pretty much every picture from Nasa has a little tag where you can see the general techniques they used to colorize or capture an image, and unlike nearly every other government agency NASA is very willing and helpful in tracking down information if you want specifics.

[Big W Powah!]

Originally Posted by Tea on tuesday

It's not like NASA ever tried to hide or cover up the fact the pictures weren't "true to life" anyway. Pretty much every picture from Nasa has a little tag where you can see the general techniques they used to colorize or capture an image, and unlike nearly every other government agency NASA is very willing and helpful in tracking down information if you want specifics.

Which is pretty much my point, and the fact that "oh em gee its not what you get" isn't fucking newsworthy.

[Plan9]

Originally Posted by Big W Powah!

Which is pretty much my point, and the fact that "oh em gee its not what you get" isn't fucking newsworthy.

Yet it's apparently worthy of your ranting throughout multiple posts - although I think I would classify that as more of a temper tantrum than a rant. I can just imagine the little vein bulging in your forehead and your face turning beat red, while spittle is flying out of your mouth as you try to speak.

[Wolfen]

...,

[Wolfen]

--

[Big W Powah!]

Originally Posted by Plan9

Yet it's apparently worthy of your ranting throughout multiple posts - although I think I would classify that as more of a temper tantrum than a rant. I can just imagine the little vein bulging in your forehead and your face turning beat red, while spittle is flying out of your mouth as you try to speak.

Tempter Tantrum? Call it what you want, but my first post was an attempt at wit, the second an attempt to clarify my point. Wasn't a rant. Wasn't a tempter tantrum. Though, instead, you come at me with some half-assed flame and a horrible attempt at wit.

I'm not sure if you decided from my username that I was some kind of "oldskewl vet" whom flaming would catapult you to some kind of fame, or if you mis-construed what I was doing. Lets review one fact though, if you were attempting the former of the two choices, you're sorely mistaken. I'm pretty much a nobody on these forums, and I prefer it that way. I don't have to worry about sackswingers, instead I get to make stupid ass flames and fly under the radar for the most part. If it was the latter, then I suggest you keep your mouth shut from now on, because you lack wit even worse than I do.