B Is this Saturn photo real or an artist's rendition?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter larry909
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photo Saturn
AI Thread Summary
The Saturn photo in question, taken by the Cassini spacecraft, appears highly processed, leading to skepticism about its authenticity. Many contributors agree that it looks like a real image from a space probe rather than an Earth telescope. The discussion highlights the common practice of digital post-processing, including sharpening and contrast adjustments, to enhance details and reduce noise from cosmic interference. Some participants express concern that such enhanced images may mislead novice astronomers about what they can expect to see through telescopes. Overall, the image is considered genuine, albeit with significant processing to improve its visual appeal.
Astronomy news on Phys.org
My guess is that probably there is some sort of digital post processing of the photo but I might be wrong and it could be the raw image, I don't have big experience on astronomical photos.
 
Looks genuine to me!
It looks like it was taken from a space probe, not an Earth telescope.
It has well defined stripes and if you zoom in it's grainy, as you would expect.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
From your own link:
"The image was taken in visible light with the Cassini spacecraft wide-angle camera on Sept. 24, 2016."
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
larry909 said:
It's hard to beleive, it looks so uniform and like it was drawn.

as the last two posters said ... it's real

Al_ said:
It looks like it was taken from a space probe, not an Earth telescope.

it does say that :wink:
 
Yea it just looks so unreal [emoji50]
 
larry909 said:
Yea it just looks so unreal [emoji50]

the universe is an amazing place with many wonders to behold :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes rbelli1 and Delta2
larry909 said:
Yea it just looks so unreal [emoji50]
I believe it's pretty common to add 'sharpening' to such pictures. That could account for the apparent extra resolution. Excessive sharpening of very common on the images (ordinary photos) in newspapers and magazines, to make up for the limited resolution of cheaper printing. It's something that can be done on pictures before they are reduced to JPEG, which can give some horrible effects.
 
  • Like
Likes larry909
Delta² said:
My guess is that probably there is some sort of digital post processing of the photo but I might be wrong and it could be the raw image, I don't have big experience on astronomical photos.

That's definitely not a raw image. It's almost certainly had various image processing techniques (like dark frame subtraction) applied and the contrast and brightness has been changed to make all the details visible. It may have even been made by a composition of multiple images. Space telescopes and probes operate in very adverse conditions, with cosmic rays and other particles frequently impacting the sensor. Using multiple images allows you to filter out the noise generated by these events without losing the details of the object.
 
  • Like
Likes larry909 and Delta2
  • #10
Drakkith said:
That's definitely not a raw image.
Yes but you could regard it as a way of presenting relevant information whilst reducing spurious effects. The same could be said of more or less any astronomical picture that's published. The blurred thing they started off with wouldn't appeal to anyone. Perhaps a health warning should be required for such images. They can be a source of deep disappointment for newbie astronomers who think that the pictures on the adverts for the scope they just bought were what they could expect to see with it.
 
  • Like
Likes larry909 and Drakkith
Back
Top