Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 05:27:49 -0800 (PST), RichA <[email protected]>
wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/

You're comparing film images made in visible light to an image made in wavelengths we can't even see?

You're really an idiot.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 22/12/2022 13:27, RichA wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/

You really are a clueless fuckwit. What are they supposed to do if not
map the wavelengths they observe onto colours that humans can see?

I don't really like the idea of mapping one of the observed wavelengths
onto yellow, but mapping the other channels onto red, green and blue is
pretty much standard practice with multispectral data.

https://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/image/ssc2003-06c-spiral-galaxy-messier-81

Is a rather less fuckwitted version intended for scientists with a
decent explanation of the channel mapping rather than the colour
contrast enhanced Facebook page they put out for airheads like you!

It is what it is since that is how it looks on the sky in those infrared wavelengths and then converted into visible light where we can see it.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 15:47:38 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
<[email protected]> wrote:

On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 7:31:42 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

You're comparing film images made in visible light to an image made in
wavelengths we can't even see?

You're really an idiot.

I think you're being harsh. At least two of the three elements whose emission lines
make up the Hubble palette also have emission lines in the infrared. Since it's only
two of three, one can't really make JWST images that look just like Hubble images -
and, of course, one wouldn't want to, because the point of an infrared telescope is
to see stuff that Hubble couldn't.

But by choosing three spectral lines suitably, and assigning them to R, G, and B
with taste, I'm sure that JWST images _could_ be made aesthetically comparable >to Hubble images.

I mean, it could have been much worse.

Instead of comparing a JWST photo of a galaxy to the garishness of the Las Vegas
Strip, he could have compared Volodomyr Zelensky's casual attire when addressing
Congress... to the outfit of the manager of a strip club.

Instead, it was Tucker Carlson who did *that*.

The intent isn't some subjective "aesthetics". The colors chosen for
the image in question are extremely good at revealing details that
would not be easily visible to the eye with many other palettes.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 7:31:42 AM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

You're comparing film images made in visible light to an image made in wavelengths we can't even see?

You're really an idiot.

I think you're being harsh. At least two of the three elements whose emission lines
make up the Hubble palette also have emission lines in the infrared. Since it's only
two of three, one can't really make JWST images that look just like Hubble images -
and, of course, one wouldn't want to, because the point of an infrared telescope is
to see stuff that Hubble couldn't.

But by choosing three spectral lines suitably, and assigning them to R, G, and B
with taste, I'm sure that JWST images _could_ be made aesthetically comparable to Hubble images.

I mean, it could have been much worse.

Instead of comparing a JWST photo of a galaxy to the garishness of the Las Vegas
Strip, he could have compared Volodomyr Zelensky's casual attire when addressing
Congress... to the outfit of the manager of a strip club.

Instead, it was Tucker Carlson who did *that*.

John Savard

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, 22 December 2022 at 15:41:14 UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 22/12/2022 13:27, RichA wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/

You really are a clueless fuckwit. What are they supposed to do if not
map the wavelengths they observe onto colours that humans can see?

I think they do it for near colour blind morons like you. We don't need childish, candy-coloured images. It doesn't take the entire pantone chart to show differences.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 5:08:29 PM UTC-8, RichA wrote:

On Thursday, 22 December 2022 at 15:41:14 UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 22/12/2022 13:27, RichA wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/

You really are a clueless fuckwit. What are they supposed to do if not
map the wavelengths they observe onto colours that humans can see?

I think they do it for near colour blind morons like you. We don't need childish, candy-coloured images. It doesn't take the entire pantone chart to show differences.

You are clearly missing the whole point of the Webb telescope... it is for the science, and not to please your expectations!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 4:56:02 PM UTC-7, Chris L Peterson wrote:

The intent isn't some subjective "aesthetics". The colors chosen for
the image in question are extremely good at revealing details that
would not be easily visible to the eye with many other palettes.

Oh, absolutely. I did notice, though, that while the galaxy itself seemed to be in only two colors - blue/white and purple, there was _one_ star in the foreground
that was greenish-yellow.

So if *three* rather than two colors were prominent in the galaxy, whatever palette might be chosen, surely more information about the galaxy might
be revealed?

However, I looked more carefully at the Facebook page to see it was a picture of Messier 81. And then I did an image search. The pictures from Hubble,
from Spitzer, from ground-based telescopes... *none* seemed to show the
galaxy in more than two colors.

So the _only_ fault of the image in question is that the palette in question did not suit his tastes - no science was left out due to not including a wavelength
that would give additional information about the distribution of some other type
of stars in the galaxy, it seems.

John Savard

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, December 22, 2022 at 8:27:51 AM UTC-5, RichA wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/

--
The most expedient way for you to deal with this is to not look at images that you do not like.

This strategy of avoiding what you do not like also applies to music, movies and food.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 17:08:27 -0800 (PST), RichA <[email protected]>
wrote:

On Thursday, 22 December 2022 at 15:41:14 UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 22/12/2022 13:27, RichA wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/ >> You really are a clueless fuckwit. What are they supposed to do if not

map the wavelengths they observe onto colours that humans can see?

I think they do it for near colour blind morons like you. We don't need childish, candy-coloured images. It doesn't take the entire pantone chart to show differences.

In fact, human color vision being what it is, intense contrasts in
colors very much emphasize things we wouldn't easily see with "milder" palettes.

The data is publicly available. Process it yourself to your tastes.
Thousands of people do that. Of course, that would require thinking
and acting, which would take time away from your primary hobby,
whining.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 23/12/2022 14:08, Chris L Peterson wrote:

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 17:08:27 -0800 (PST), RichA <[email protected]>
wrote:

On Thursday, 22 December 2022 at 15:41:14 UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 22/12/2022 13:27, RichA wrote:

Remember the subtlety of the film images of things like the Andromeda galaxy and other deepsky objects? This is what we get now. Looks like they pulled it off the Strip in Vegas.

https://www.facebook.com/NASAWebb/photos/a.401585850048/10159260805595049/ >>> You really are a clueless fuckwit. What are they supposed to do if not

map the wavelengths they observe onto colours that humans can see?

I think they do it for near colour blind morons like you. We don't need childish, candy-coloured images. It doesn't take the entire pantone chart to show differences.

In fact, human color vision being what it is, intense contrasts in
colors very much emphasize things we wouldn't easily see with "milder" palettes.

But in this case they are quite literally mapping the infrared wavebands
onto the RGB channels that then make up a colour image.

This one in 24u(R), 8u(G) and 3.6u(B)is more to my taste.

https://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/image/ssc2003-06d-spiral-galaxy-messier-81

Blue channel is pretty much mostly starlight whereas the 8u and 24u
represent denser molecular clouds and star formation. Be interesting to
compare it with the VLA high resolution 21cm neutral hydrogen maps.

It isn't like they are taking a single greyscale image and applying some
wild colourful transform to it like a Peano-Koch curve for instance.

The data is publicly available. Process it yourself to your tastes.
Thousands of people do that. Of course, that would require thinking
and acting, which would take time away from your primary hobby,
whining.

His hobby has been whining for quite a while now. ISTR There was a time
long ago when he sometimes wrote about interesting bits of kit here.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)