Branko Dimitrijevic

Branko Dimitrijevic

Joined on Apr 4, 2012

Comments

Total: 2, showing: 1 – 2
In reply to:

Scott Eaton: I'm not by any means a NASA engineer, but I am an Engineer on the IT side of things. I realize we're working with extreme data management constraints and 2004 technology curves.

My issue is why we're using a bayer based sensor when we want the most discrete data to come from our hardware. Why waste data pathing with all that interpolated nonsese just because somebody is more familiar with Kodak. We're taking pictures of other worlds, not snaphots of your kids.

Here's to hoping Kodak is out of business so they are forced to use better hardware the next time around.

There is no reason to transfer the interpolated data. You just transfer the sensed data and do the interpolation off-site (i.e. on Earth).

Direct link | Posted on Aug 17, 2012 at 12:14 UTC
On Canon launches EOS 60Da DSLR for astrophotography article (227 comments in total)
In reply to:

Joshlovesphotos: And.....here we go again DPReview. You basically copy and pasted the advertising from Canon's press release onto your "Review" site. Only problem is, when you "review" something, isn't the point of the site to take another, more objective view of a product? You should call yourselves, DPAdvertisers.

Problem? Well, besides apparently being the only person here with an iq over 100, how about the fact that hydrogen-alpha light is NOT the true color of the cosmos. You know those galaxy and nebulae that you see on science shows in awe striking color? Yeah. Thats false color. That's not TRUE color, I don't care how subjective it is. The human eye does not see colors that way. This article's main title should read "CANON ANNOUNCES MODIFIED 60D (60DA) WITH STRONGER INFRARED SENSOR THAT PRODUCES FALSE COLOR IN ORDER TO MORE EASILY PHOTOGRAPH THE COSMOS".

So basically you just pasted NEWS and FALSE ADVERTISING onto your "review" site, that is just chock full of adverts really.

Anyone aware of the breadth of the electromagnetic spectrum knows how limited our human "vision" truly is. Are infra-red images less "true" just because your eyes can't see them? Are radio-images less true, or X-ray?

All these images are true because they convey the accurate information about what is really out there. We have just "shifted" this information somewhat so our limited eyes can see it.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 4, 2012 at 13:44 UTC
Total: 2, showing: 1 – 2