posted on Jun, 25 2007 @ 08:58 PM
Originally posted by bhihni
This is the reason for the original post. Are these new high resolution scans supposed to be historically accurate, or are they just basically new
marketing pics? The dirt looks like it has been washed away. Any one who has seen only the new scans see a nice clean suit.
And this leads to other questions. Are the older pics more historically accurate than the new ones. Have we ever seen the most accurately scanned pics
yet?
So sorry for the delay. My weekend ended up not allowing any free time.
The amount of soil on the suit is the same. Look closely. You don't need anyone else, just your eyes. The mid-ranges have been lightened so the
soiling of the suits looks less obvious. The filter they used appears to be a lot like the Nikon "D-Lighting" filter in "CaptureNX" which only
lightens shadows or darker parts of an image while preserving color and detail. The colors would be done by picking an item on a suit of a known color
value. Then you can adjust to get accurate color for the whole image just by knowing the one color value.
I'd guess (only a guess) that NASA is just trying to preserve these old photo's and while they are at it they are correcting color and enhancing
them. They would be criticized if they did not do this and they will be criticized for doing this. Either way the original negatives are probably
degraded beyond repair and the prints are probably reaching their shelf life. It is good they are addressing this.
I still plan on making a basic explanation of things like shadows, perspective and such. Time is at a premium right now due to work. I have a few days
off coming up and I'll try and put something together as another post..