How NASA Colors Images of the Universe
Вставка
- Опубліковано 26 лют 2023
- Data image developers combine science and art to bring color to JWST's images.
Follow on social for more NOVA content!
Twitter: / novapbs
Instagram: / novapbs
TikTok: / novapbs
This excerpt from a NOVA documentary is made possible by viewers like you. Support your local PBS station here: pbs.org/donate/ - Наука та технологія
![Everything NASA Discovered from James Webb's First Year in Space [4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nbDQEo0uA0Q/mqdefault.jpg)
![Everything NASA Discovered from James Webb's First Year in Space [4K]](/img/tr.png)
where i come from we call it PHOTOSHOP
Gotta love the fact they are Using Pixinsight!
Regardless of colors, the universe is magnificent 😍🥰😍
So, what color are they really?
infrared
@@twonumber22 , so if we travelled into space we wouldn't be able to see their true colors?
@@MrFossil367ab45gfyth The ancient light from all these distant galaxies were "streched" into the infrared end/side of the electromagnetic spectrum because of cosmic inflation. A few believe in "tired light" theory, it's not that well understood. The objects outside the Milky Way did have all sorts of color like the stars in our galaxy, but the light has degraded since then. They can still figure out what colors it used to be.
@@twonumber22 , oh ok thanks for clarifying.
@@MrFossil367ab45gfyth black and white
I wish they’d leave the art part of it out
How would they do that, though? It's not like they're adding in extra stars or streaks of color. They're simply layering the colors they can work with in order to make it appealing, yeah, but also to match up with similar objects we are able to see. The scientists using data from these telescopes will work with information that hasn't been stylized at all so creating these neat looking images isn't damaging the science the can be done.
@@zettagotbored9341 The decision to attribute these colors to aspects in the image like Oxygen being blue are for the most part subjective and artistic. They could choose to apply it in reverse and make Oxygen red and invert the palette at a whim and you'd have completely different results, just like you could by messing with the RGB process. I think this is closer to a heat map image (but instead of heat it's elements) that lets us map out what's happening in those images-- having them side by side with the original black and white, maybe a really weak attempt at RGB, and then the element mapped we all are star-struck by would be more fulfilling and educational to us, I think.
🎉ua-cam.com/video/BAuET8rA7NA/v-deo.html more info about the colors in the first 10min of this video from NOVA/PBS
Cool
That’s sikkk
I want to know if these images are computer generated or actual photos
They’re actual photos.
A lot of deep space objects can be seen from your backyard with a good telescope
I recently got my own pictures of Andromeda and of the Orion Nebula with a telescope as big as my head, it just takes time
These aren't computer generated
I wish they would disclose more clearly on the images presented that they are artificially colorized and do not represent what these star systems look like to the naked eye. And what is the purpose of colorizing these images other than creating beautiful things for the public to look at? Do the colorized images serve any scientific purpose in understanding these systems?
YES they do. You CAN NOT SEE these wavelengths. They are INVISIBLE to your eyes. And mostly the images will say, FALSE COLOUR!
What they explain here, visible light images are produced the same way. Three black and white images taken through each of three colour filters... and then recombined and colour added to them. You really need to look up how photography is done. How does your "smart phone" make images?
@@rickkwitkoski1976 It's pretty obvious they take some artistic license though. They take artistic license in adding color that I could not legally do as a government photographer and photojournalist for 12 years. I'd have to observe him doing it, and talking me through it to see just how subjective it is.
@@troy3456789 But you CAN NOT SEE infrared. In order to make ANY visible image at all. The light is transposed into the visible band.
Did you not understand the analogy of music "key transposition"?
Your eyes CAN NOT SEE infrared. This is completely invisible to your eyes. So the wavelengths are "transposed" into the visible band.
Try this. I assume that you have a remote control of some sort. Like for a TV? Look at the business end and press any button. Go ahead! It won't hurt you!
What do you SEE? NOTHING! Why? Because it uses infrared light. Now pick up your "smart phone" or any digital camera with a digital display. Now look at the end of the remote and press a button. WOW! You now see a spot of light! The camera took the INVISIBLE infrared and transposed into visible light that is now displayed on the digital screen.
I've been doing digital photography for 20 years now. I used some very early commercially available cameras back then. One that a buddy had was very crude by today's standards. A 3.5 inch FLOPPY DISK was used to store the images!
Any image that I take today that I want to keep and either display or print, I tweak it just a bit. Cameras, as you should well know, are NOT the same as our eyes. They don't capture exactly what we see. So I add/reduce a bit of shadow or highlight, give just a bit more saturation of colour... not too much or the image definitely WILL look fake. Just a bit of enhancement and the images POP! Have you used a cameras with HDR, high dynamic range? Are the images "fake"? NO! But if you study them, it is pretty easy to see that there are even MORE colours than your eye might have seen initially.
well unfortunately you need pretty images to engage a mostly doesn't-care audience because spending billions on science is good actually. If that's easier to do with pretty images from Hubble and now the new hotness - oh well. I mean, the color could be added arbitrarily, and there is some value to humans looking at the colorized version to see contrasts that otherwise, only in black and white, hide details.
@@rickkwitkoski1976 why DO YOU feel the need TO CAPATLIZE like YOU are DOING?!
🌏🌌🌌
Quite literally, color is all in our heads...
?? Il quadrato (E
=M x c -_2 ? E elevata al quadrato? E la sua equazione termodinamica o dequalificazione termodinamica,,,,,∆s universo,
2023 26 April 9:30PM Halley's Comet occurred tonight and as suggested from 1986 this message is given. Next Halley's Comet should be added for Year 2100 77 Years from tonight.
So all of those brilliant colors, are really only what they tell us to see. 🤔
NO!
Did you not understand the analogy of music "key transposition"?
Your eyes CAN NOT SEE infrared. This is completely invisible to your eyes. So the wavelengths are "transposed" into the visible band.
Try this. I assume that you have a remote control of some sort. Like for a TV? Look at the business end and press any button. Go ahead! It won't hurt you!
What do you SEE? NOTHING! Why? Because it uses infrared light. Now pick up your "smart phone" or any digital camera with a digital display. Now look at the end of the remote and press a button. WOW! You now see a spot of light! The camera took the INVISIBLE infrared and transposed into visible light that is now displayed on the digital screen.
@@rickkwitkoski1976 Duh. Did you not understand it when he said "It comes out flat and needs some compositional work"? Then she says it gets subjective, meaning they decide what colors are used. That means they tell us what brilliant colors to see, because they are the ones that put them there. The colors that we see, are added by humans in earth.
@@AFloridaSon they aren't added. They are exposed. That's why the word exposure in the world of photography. The same process is used with photos on photo paper.
Talking calmly, yes and no. Hypothetically, you could take an image in every wavelength JWST can see and assign each of those to a wavelength in the visible spectrum using an algorithm. You could then create that transition and come out with an image that would be too large to share over the internet and probably look like a mess. What they're trying to do, is get as close as they can to what this would look like if we could stand in front of it and see it in the visible band. So, yes, it is a bit subjective in that they use only a few layers and have to decide how to best put them together to look kinda cool but also to look like similar objects we can see in the visible band. Also, yes, they are "choosing" which colors to assign to which layers, but that is done based on science not just vibes.
So, yes, we see things as scientists color them, but, no, it isn't done randomly and is still a relatively objective process based on scientific findings
😲
Wait... if I'm butt naked in space in front of these things. Is this how they will look? Or is it gonna be just bright white light? Or no lights? Quit lying to me!... next imma find out Pluto was and is a planet, and the moon really IS made of cheese?!?!?
they lost me early
this is why astronomers make all the bad ideas about the universe. they all look at fantasy alterations of the universe when in reality there is only one color.
black and white looks loke a scary clown.lol
They remove the green from Mars images so any moss won't show up.
Drugs are bad, mkay!
🤣 You must be joking
Are You that ignorant? Or you need attention
@@Nefertiti0403 should have seen the first map of gale crater, it was so fake I called them on it. Now it's a full multiplayer GIS map.
@@solomonkane102you were dropped on your head as a kid weren't you? My guy you can literally see how red Mars is without a telescope. If you know where it is in the nightsky you can see that it appears red. Because it's red. Well, more buttsotch or beige but the point still stands. I've taken a picture of Mars with a $100 telescope and I can personally confirm that there is no green on Mars
First 🏆
I love how they pretend to take detailed pictures of black holes complete with accretion disks.
When?
This isn't that nice. Taking "artistic license"? I really thought we were looking at the colors after a normal, non-subjective shift to visible light waves.
How could it NOT be subjective? The three images that are assigned RGB aren't in any way related to visible RGB "bands".
"a normal, non-subjective shift to visible light waves." - that doesn't actually exist. Even their so-called shift over to the visual, like changing key, is subjective. thats not more correct that just assigning visual colors randomly. It FEELS more proper, but feelings are not subjective - and changing the key to a song can have massive repercussions in how people feel about it - you might hate it or love it.
@@xBINARYGODx I don't hate it or love it. I am interested in what's way out there in space, but only to a minor degree. It doesn't seem to hold the same implications for me as the discovery of evolution, natural selection and survival of the fittest. I think much of modern humanity has decided to champion the idea of doing a reversal on natural selection; and seems to be trying to see if they can promote and support the least fit, while marginalizing and punishing the fittest in society. It should be interesting to see how all that turns out in my opinion. We shall see.
@@rickkwitkoski1976 I think what they get back isn't absolutely monochrome.
@@troy3456789 light is a really weird thing to try to think about because you're trying to imagine colors that don't exist. You are correct that the images aren't monochrome, though. They do contain several wavelengths which means there are several "colors" in the data gathered. If you were to carefully go through and determine every present wavelength and create an algorithm to shift each of those into the range of human sight it would take an incredibly long time and probably not look great.
This process is a "cheat" for that longer one, but it is still objective in that they don't add or subtract anything. They're trying to create an image that's interesting to look at and that has depth, but they aren't going to throw in an extra star or add totally random colors just because they can. Astrophysicists can go in and pull the exact wavelengths they need from the overall data to conduct whatever specific research they need. When making stuff to see vaguely what it might look like if we could stand in front of it and look at it, there is something to be said for getting it to a point where the colors are overlaid in a way that looks cool
How majestic and elegant the creations of our God & Fsthet!