Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #357049

Re: Near True

Cross-posted to 4 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> writes:
> 
> >Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>
> >> How NASA uses the term:
> >>
> >> http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question20.html
> >>
> >> Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_color
> 
> >Okay, yours user-edited website reads:
> 
> >A false-color image is an image that depicts an object in colors that
> >differ from those a photograph (a "true-color" image) would show.
> 
> That's all you need to know.
> 
> Think of an old-time color photograph negative.  That's a false color
> image, but one from which a true color image can be recreated.
> A black-and-white photograph is also false color.
> 
> Sometimes false color is the only way to do it.  Like a photo in the
> infrared or ultraviolet.  You *must* use false color for that, what would
> a true-color infrared photograph look like?
> 
> IR and UV can show details not visible in visible light.  Ever see a photo
> of flowers in the ultraviolet, the way a bee would see it?  Can't do it
> without false color.  I have a false color aerial photograph of where I
> live from 20 years ago.  It's in infrared and visible light.  Infrared is
> shown as red.  Healthy vegetation (farm fields, golf courses etc.) show up
> as bright red as healthy vegetation reflects IR very well.  Not so healthy
> vegetation as dull red or pinkish.  It shows the health in much more
> detail than just looking at it, as both look green.
> 
> >I don't see any difference....it's still 'meant to deceive, incorrect,
> >not according with truth or fact.'
> 
> How can it be meant to deceive if they explicitly say it's false color?
> Esp. when they explicitly give color mapping, like my USGS false color
> photograph?  It says that infrared appears as red, red as green and green
> as blue, as well as giving the actual wavelengths.

I think you got lost somewhere...

The Subject heading of this threads reads? "Near True".

then I posted NASA article:

NASA publishes 1st 'near-true color' images of Pluto 
http://rt.com/usa/268678-nasa-first-pluto-images/


They didn't write false colors...

somebody came into my thread and added "false colors" which was never mentioned in the news...


"false colors" was not mentioned in the news...


What was mentioned was 'near-true color' and simulated true-colour ....but no mentioned of the words "false colors".


Tell your News Science People that I said to put in the Headline  "false colors", instead of 
'near-true color' and "simulated true-colour", okay?


Because everybody knows what "false" means.


So the average person can say..."Oh, it's fuckin fake color photos!"

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-06-21 13:11 -0700
  Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-05 19:01 -0700
    Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-07 20:22 -0700
      Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-08 14:26 -0700
      Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-09 10:52 -0700
        Re: Near True Simoen <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-10 22:41 -0500
      Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-13 23:10 -0700
        Re: Near True benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-07-14 03:00 -0400
          Re: Near True Simoen <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-14 11:34 -0500
  Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-10 19:41 -0700
    Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-10 19:43 -0700
      Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-12 21:45 -0700
        Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-13 12:11 -0700
        Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-13 15:53 -0700
          Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-13 22:48 -0700
            Re: Near True Simoen <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-14 10:47 -0500
              Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-14 10:34 -0700
              Re: Near True HVAC <Mr.HVAC@gmail.com> - 2015-07-16 07:14 -0400
          Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-24 13:55 -0700
            Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-26 20:52 -0700
              Re: Near True The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-07-29 11:48 -0700
            Near True2 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-01 23:54 -0700
              Re: Near True2 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-02 00:57 -0700
                Re: Near True2 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-02 12:37 -0700
                Re: Near True2 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-02 14:04 -0700
                Re: Near True2 The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-02 17:35 -0700
  Re: Near True Simoen <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-07-10 22:37 -0500

csiph-web