Hubble Images interpretation & manipulation

[vonnagy]

here's an interesting one, this is on no one particular photographer, but it brings up the point of how space images from the hubble space telescope are interpreted by astronomers.

"The Hubble images are part of the romantic landscape tradition. They fit that popular, familiar model of what the natural world should look like."

The raw data that the Hubble transmits consist of black-and-white electronic images with little definition or detail.

A team of astronomers takes three raw Hubble filters - which each record a different wavelength of light - combines them, and then interprets their meaning, applying colour to each filtered image, removing streaks and cropping the image.

Ms Kessler said this process required making "subjective choices regarding contrast, composition and colour".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4278949.stm

Whats interesting and of note is that space images have been known to be manipulated by 'Scientists'. And i am not talking about the Moon conspiracy. For instance, the mars rover pictures have had a great deal of 'red tint' added to them, to support the notion the notion of the 'Red planet'.

What are you thoughts on this?

 

[Hertz van Rental]

The next time you go for an X-ray, ask your Doctor if the data will be manipulated to conform to a post-neo-classicist stereotype of what your body should look like and see what he says.

 

[ksmattfish]

It's like making the super model's legs longer, and cleaning up her acne; it's marketing to the masses. Make it look grand and exciting or next time they aren't going to fund the next space mission.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Or maybe scientists are really frustrated artists who wish they hadn't taken the safe option.
"Er.. Doctor Smith. We don't mind you enhancing the colours of the images to make Astronomy more attractive to the masses. But we are concerned that you are using Photoshop to put little green men on Mars.... no, we don't think artistic licence covers it..."

 

[Unimaxium]

I don't think it really matters. After all, it's not like we're going to go visit those clouds of gas like in that photo, and I doubt the information regarding their color is that important to human civilization. So I say fine, let them look pretty, so we can all go ooooh and aaaah over the colorfulness of the universe

 

[Sergiozal]

I don't think it really matters. After all, it's not like we're going to go visit those clouds of gas like in that photo, and I doubt the information regarding their color is that important to human civilization. So I say fine, let them look pretty, so we can all go ooooh and aaaah over the colorfulness of the universe

My thought too...
It is not going to change anything down here.

 

[mrsid99]

They look like sea-squirts to me anyway!

 

[DocFrankenstein]

I don't think it really matters. After all, it's not like we're going to go visit those clouds of gas like in that photo, and I doubt the information regarding their color is that important to human civilization. So I say fine, let them look pretty, so we can all go ooooh and aaaah over the colorfulness of the universe

Actually, in all probability, the images would just look white if only the visible spectrum was printed.

They have to take other kinds of radiation, and the only way for us to see it would be print it.

BTW: I doubt the scientists care about the "coloring" of the pictures. They'll analyze BW images from each channel anyway.

 

[ShutteredEye]

My thought on the matter is that there has to be some sort of structure there to generate the different signals. The coloring all depends on who's looking....

Pretty cool pics.

 

[Artemis]

I think it doesnt matter too much...as long as our scientists get accurate data then I think its fine...

(wow...first post in here!)