|
Is this Jupiter Video Real or CGI?
|
|
| Proteus | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 19:46 | Message # 1 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 173
Status: Offline
| This youtube video shows "4K Maps" of Jupiter. It's description does not determine if this is real imagery or CGI recreated imagery to depict it. In the comments of this video is a really bad mess of conspiracy theorists using it for their "NASA is a lie" parades. As far as I can reason, there are real images of Jupiter of course, but there are also re-creations and shopped imagery also, for the sake of promotion and emphasis on certain features. I have a feeling this video is not an accurate depiction of Jupiter, mainly because, every cgi-confirmed imagery of Jupiter tends to have much higher contrast in its colors and quite exaggerated ambient lighting that is more known to be created by CGI than your typical photo. What do you think? Is this real or re-created? And how can we really tell/prove whether or not it is real or re-created?
Edited by Proteus - Thursday, 08.09.2016, 19:48 |
| |
| |
| steeljaw354 | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 19:49 | Message # 2 |
 World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
| I'd say it's fake due to the high contrast
|
| |
| |
| Bells_Theorem | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 21:03 | Message # 3 |
 Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 188
Status: Offline
| With certainty, it is mostly real image data that has been enhanced and stitched together to create a map. I wouldn't call that "faked" as it is real data that has been processed to fit a desired format.
Anyone who thinks that this is evidence of a NASA cover-up really needs to see a psychologist.
|
| |
| |
| steeljaw354 | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 21:05 | Message # 4 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
| I don't think it is a cover up. I'd say they edited it to look a certain way and you wouldn't see that same image when you look at jupiter through a telescope.
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 21:43 | Message # 5 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| It's obviously fake. I can tell by the pixels, and I have seen quite a few photoshops in my day.
|
| |
| |
| Bells_Theorem | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 22:05 | Message # 6 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 188
Status: Offline
| Quote steeljaw354 (  ) I don't think it is a cover up. I'd say they edited it to look a certain way and you wouldn't see that same image when you look at jupiter through a telescope.
Astronomical image data is almost always enhanced to bring out features that would normally be difficult or impossible to see. This doesn't make it fake, it makes it enhanced. "Fake" means a forgery or not genuine intended to deceive. there is no indication or reason to believe the above is either of these.
|
| |
| |
| Watsisname | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 22:07 | Message # 7 |
|
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2613
Status: Offline
| Exactly. Astrophotography would be extremely boring if we showed everything exactly the way your eyes would see it. 
|
| |
| |
| DoctorOfSpace | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 22:11 | Message # 8 |
 Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3600
Status: Offline
| Watsisname, I must concur. Having seen many pixels in my time those pixels are definitely illegitimate pixels.
Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
|
| |
| |
| Proteus | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 22:35 | Message # 9 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 173
Status: Offline
| Quote Bells_Theorem ( ) With certainty, it is mostly real image data that has been enhanced and stitched together to create a map. I wouldn't call that "faked" as it is real data that has been processed to fit a desired format.
I can't tell what you mean by this. What exactly do you mean by data in this case? And what do you mean by "processed to fit a desired format"? Could you clarify?
|
| |
| |
| Bells_Theorem | Date: Thursday, 08.09.2016, 22:50 | Message # 10 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 188
Status: Offline
| Quote Proteus ( ) I can't tell what you mean by this. What exactly do you mean by data in this case? And what do you mean by "processed to fit a desired format"? Could you clarify?
Data = Photons captured, focused and detected by a telescope represented digitally in stored image files.
Processed = Stitched together as a mosaic to form a single continuous map, color and contrast enhanced to bring out features and mapped to a CGI sphere for presentation.
This doesn't constitute fakery nor does it imply there was any intent to deceive.
My guess is that the majority of those in the comment section claiming that it does are trolls having a laugh. Though there are probably a few genuine conspiracy nutters in there who are completely incapable of applying Occam's Razor.
Edited by Bells_Theorem - Thursday, 08.09.2016, 22:59 |
| |
| |
| FastFourierTransform | Date: Friday, 09.09.2016, 15:30 | Message # 11 |
 Pioneer
Group: Local Moderators
Spain
Messages: 542
Status: Offline
| Well I think this is a philosophy of language problem, not a scientific one.
The girl of your example is not fake (maybe the cathegory fake has no meaning in this general terms) what is fake is his body structure and the colors. You have to know what is fake and what not. Does many fake characteristics of a thing make a thing fake? mmmmm Maybe false. But again. The threashold is arbitrary und subjective.
The image of the Milky Way on the night sky is fake? well, the luminosity maybe, but the colors, the position, etc... is that. Your girl is fake? well, the contour is a deviationn from reality, the colors are false but maybe the spatial distribution of colors is real and other things are real. My point was that everytime there's an observation that has been represented or visualized in some form it has a fake component and a real one in different degrees.
You are always dealing with representations and visualizations of data. Many times the data is presented to you by instruments (cameras for example) that translate the records in a format that allows your biological instruments (your eyes) to see them exactly as you expect. Other times the instrument can translate the info to another format and you only visualize ceros and ones (does that make a fake image of jupiter?).
Pure non-faked data is just the phenomenon itself of wich you extracted the data. Data has to be represented. In this graph you see the velocities of stars in the galactic disk as a function of distance:
It represent what is mean to represent but the distance in the graph don't correpond at all to the distances in real life (it has been tweeked like the girl of your example). Even more, the distance in the graph (not this one) could be represented in logarithmic scale. Is that a distortion of reality meant to deceive us? Well, no, maybe is youst a manipulation of data or just it's representation (you can't see the velocity of stars in the graph itself but a geometric representation of all of them in an axis) to make clearer some things about the data. You can distort the graph in a way that what you want to notice pops up. The artist that defromed that girl thinks that is a noble sacrifice to throw out the information about the geometric shape of the girl to enhance the beauty he sees in her, or maybe he really wants to deceive us. Your video of Jupiter sacrificed the data about real color intensity to make clearer the data about the existence of complex atmospheric structures. Your video of Jupiter sacrificed the infromation about how each image was taken pasting them toghether so the information about the global continuous connection of the object could be enhanced. They simply sacrificed some info to make more clear other data equally real that was more subtle or even hidden in the images. I think that the category "fake" does not fit with the idea or it's implications. Obviously what your video is not at all is a video recording in real time of Jupiter.
Quote Proteus ( ) Also, unless I'm mistaken, the sphere the textures were put on are a lot less oblate than I believe Jupiter actually is
Totally agree with this
Edited by FastFourierTransform - Friday, 09.09.2016, 15:34 |
| |
| |
| steeljaw354 | Date: Friday, 09.09.2016, 19:47 | Message # 12 |
|
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
| Jupiter is more oblate and not a perfect sphere as shown in the video. When I said 'fake' I mean that the images taken aren't what you would see if you were looking at it through a telescope or if you were on one of it's moons, the colors of the video aren't as dark as you would see at jupiter. I'm not one of those retards that think Earth is flat or something else
Edited by steeljaw354 - Friday, 09.09.2016, 19:52 |
| |
| |
| Bells_Theorem | Date: Friday, 09.09.2016, 20:27 | Message # 13 |
|
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 188
Status: Offline
| Quote steeljaw354 ( ) Jupiter is more oblate and not a perfect sphere as shown in the video. When I said 'fake' I mean that the images taken aren't what you would see if you were looking at it through a telescope or if you were on one of it's moons, the colors of the video aren't as dark as you would see at jupiter. I'm not one of those retards that think Earth is flat or something else
I get what you mean, however, I think using the term "fake" attaches unintended implications that there is somehow an intent to deceive. When you read through the comments of the video, it is quite clear that this is the intended meaning by the posters when they say it is "fake" or "CGI".
The problem is that there is a growing community of conspiracy theorists who flood every scientific video, news article and social media. This culture is affecting how newcomers to science view and trust established science. It affects how people view and trust scientists as a whole. It affects how people make decisions or vote on serious issues like climate change or how people make medical decisions. It provides non existent cracks where people with agendas can inject their own doubt or woo. I'm saddened and concerned by how much this culture has grown in just the past few decades. It disrupts our growth towards a better future.
The word fake implies a deception. So unless you wish to perpetuate the NASA and Science conspiracies, I would suggest using a less condemning and more accurate term like "enhanced" or "modified".
|
| |
| |
| Solaris | Date: Friday, 09.09.2016, 20:53 | Message # 14 |
 World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
France
Messages: 731
Status: Offline
| For more informations about these great Jupiter global maps :
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2015/37/full/
|
| |
| |
ENG
New site
United States 
Pirate 
Spain 
France