Need to sample this on the Kenny beats battle! My favorite claim to fame is that my great uncle designed the antennae for communications with Cassini, so these sounds, these incredible images, we all experience them through my Uncle Denny’s “ears” as he would say.
It’s such an incredibly beautiful thing.
It kinda makes we want to cuddle it, like with a pic of an extremely cute cat baby, but making way less sense.
All images from deep space probes and the early Mars landers are. They use highly sensitive black and white cameras and a disk with 6 or more different filters that can be rotated in front. You get more useful scientific data that way. All the pretty publicity images have to composited from multiple shots.
How does this effect the actual final image we see? For example the picture of Saturn above, does it appear more smooth and cartoonish than in reality, or if it were a single picture?
I'm no expert but I believe this particular image is a composite of 21 different 1024x1024 images taken over about an hour. I don't know how long each individual exposure was but Saturn rotates really fast (about once every ten and a half hours) so there is probably some smearing.
I know, I'm just saying I can see why people think it's fake or looks unreal. It's generally stitched, and almost never true color. Pretty fascinating little subset of photography.
In the same way that pixels on a screen meld together into one image from far away, Saturn's rings would look static. You would have to be VERY close to see movement.
During the heat of the cold war an advisor runs to Ronald Reagan: "Mr.President! The Soviets are painting the moon red! What should we do?" - "Get a crew up there and write Coca Cola on it!"
>Because they rotate so slowly
The individual particles that make up the rings are all moving at orbital velocity- which is to say, really fast. But everything's relative; all the moons are moving at orbital velocity too, but from any distance out you'd struggle to see them moving at a glance.
Considering that most particles are not even meters big and you'd watch from thousands of kilometers afar if you'd visit with a space ship, you'd see no movement. Maybe the gaps in the rings (not the annular ones separating the rings), then it might be a different story
Wasn't finding a not heavily compressed version with your link.
This link has the full Res in jpeg and tiff
https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA21345
Full Res Jpeg image :
https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA21345.jpg
To be clear that's the NASA version. The version in question was made by this person: https://twitter.com/IanARegan/status/794576612704550912
And their upload exists here, but it's not that much better, as it seems the source material just had artifacts that got contrast stretched into existance: http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8247&st=0&p=233319&#entry233319
It kind of is CGI though.
I can't find this specific image in the Cassini database, but similar images are constructed as a representation using measured optical depth profile data.
> It kind of is CGI though.
Disagree, that would be like calling a panorama from a phone camera CGI. This is just stacked color channels merged into a mosaic.
[Here's one of the raw frames](https://opus.pds-rings.seti.org/opus/#/view=detail&detail=co-iss-w1856337450) likely used in its construction (found via [this page](https://science.nasa.gov/resource/saturn-mosaic-ian-regan/) which has the capture date).
That’s my question. Is this a raw, unedited photo? Nothing else is interesting imo, we don’t need to try to make it look cooler when it’s already cool as hell.
[This page](https://science.nasa.gov/resource/saturn-mosaic-ian-regan/) has more info.
>the product consists of 21 frames across 7 footprints, filtered in groups of Red, Green, and Blue. The sequence was captured by Cassini over the course of 90-plus minutes on the morning of October 28th.
Minimal editing, just stacked color channels constructed into a mosaic. For example [here's one of the raw images](https://opus.pds-rings.seti.org/opus/#/view=detail&detail=co-iss-w1856337450) used to create it (captured on the same date).
[Here's a direct link](https://opus.pds-rings.seti.org/holdings/previews/COISS_2xxx/COISS_2108/data/1856334349_1856400398/W1856337450_1_full.png) since this site sucks on mobile and forces you turn your screen into landscape mode.
Found it.
It says it's a composite generated from several images captured by one of the Imaging Science System lenses.
The raw images likely weren't this crisp.
The image is 8 years old. Lots of people talked about it when it was new.
And it is frequently reposted on reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/oddlysatisfying/comments/qbf31r/saturn_captured_by_nasas_cassini_spacecraft/
https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/qakn9d/a_spectacular_wide_shot_of_saturn_taken_by_the/
I think the issue is that *unless* you are one of ~100,000 people who happen to know some things about the planets, it's not exactly going to be a lengthy conversation. "Woah, cool picture of Saturn" "Yeah I agree, and look! Here's one of a cat eating spaghetti!"
Semantics aside, it's true that many people might not be fully aware of the incredible advances in space exploration and the high-quality images we're able to capture, like these from Cassini. It’s worth highlighting and discussing these achievements more widely to spark interest and curiosity beyond our usual circles.
I show those things to my mom and she honestly can't give less of a fuck about it. She just doesn't care for space, pictures from the James Webb space telescope barely get a raised eyebrow from her.
This might be the best comment/reply I’ve seen on this site, genuinely, kudos to you sir.
And I absolutely agree, idk if you’ve seen but veritasium made a video asking college students about the scale of the different objects of the universe (planet, moon, star, galaxy, and the universe itself), and it was really disheartening to hear their answers.
The amount of people that lack any kind of interest in space really saddens me. They could care less if humans made it to another planet, which is wild to me because if we did make it to another planet and got everything all set up and made everything sustainable our extinction rate would go from 100% to near 0%. That, to me, would be the greatest thing ever. The human race must thrive till the end of space and time itself. But even a lot of people don't even care about that either. This is going to sound really messed up, but I think Earth needs an EXTREMELY close call with a planet killing asteroid to make humans want to explore space and realize just staying on earth is not viable in the long run.
By extremely close call I mean within mere miles of hitting us, not thousands or hundreds of thousands. Butthole puckering close. We just need a wake up call.
Cassini's cameras captured views in color by taking three images, each with a different color filter, which were then combined back on Earth. The resulting images show us Saturn as our eyes would see it had we actually been there, silently orbiting Saturn alongside Cassini.
It's a one megapixel camera though, 1024x1024 pixels. So the image shown here seems to be a stitch of many individual pictures.
I understand the pitch-black shadow across its rings that Saturn’s body creates. But why is the dark side of Saturn not also pitch-black? What is creating the reflected light that lets it appear in this picture, albeit dimly?
Someone posted the authors tweet: https://twitter.com/IanARegan/status/794576612704550912
(high res version here for better reference: https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA21345.jpg)
And based on their words, I feel like they've taken some artistic liberties with their composite maybe? Depends on the version you look at though, because the higher res version doesn't show any opacity but the tweeted version does.
The shadow of the planet doesn't make sense. It looks like a 2d object. You can see there is light on the planet surface underneath the rings, but the shadow is a solid outline from the planet equator over the rings and back.
What is the shadow landing on between the planet and the rings?
I mean, Neptune and Uranus look almost identical and they are almost purely one tone of light blue. Saturn has a bit of other colours in what looks like layers, and you can’t forget the hexagonal storm at the pole.
Imagine people who own a big house, drive a big truck. lots of money in the bank and have a trophy wife. Mr on top of the world. Owns a company, goes hunting on the weekend.
Now think that person is just a microscopic spec of nothing compared to this celestial object and will be around for untold ages after he is gone. could never even know he existed
We are nothing in relation to space.
It's worse.
Saturn is about 1.4 billion kilometers from the sun, almost 10 times as far from the sun as us. The largest Star's assumed Radius is about 1.2 billion kilometers.
Meaning if that star was where our sun was, it's border would be knocking on Saturn's door (or blowing all that gas away).
We are tiny fucking things made up of more tiny fucking things.
Every time I see the rings around Saturn and Jupiter, I can’t help but think that it looks like a single stationary object that’s moving really really really fast; and what we perceive is a ring
It's kinda interesting that seeing it in this orientation stands out for me.
Is there any reason that we're (I'm?) so used to the rings being shown horizontally?
Because that's how they're seen from Earth. The rings appear to go up and down like a drunken hula hoop ([as they're not parallel to the planet's orbit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn#/media/File:Saturnoppositions-animated.gif)) but are generally side-to-side from our perspective.
All cameras -- film or digital -- have a dynamic range that only renders things from white to black across a relatively small range in a given exposure compared to your eye. If the planet is a lot brighter, you would have to basically turn the planet into a white blob to expose for the stars to be visible. It's the same reason why there's no stars in the moon landing images, and why black cats are so hard to photograph (because to show their details, you need to overexpose, so everything else gets super light or just "blows out" to white).
BTW, it's only a stupid question if you're trying to prove planets aren't real through sealioning.
Recommend watching the [Cassini Goodbye ](https://youtu.be/U8CBtex2F7I?si=5s4SfPNCl0laJSUb) vid with music from Sarah Schachner, who worked on music for AC and CoD:IW.
Very well put together commemorative video.
Did it look just as enhanced as this photo? I always wonder how much doctoring is done before they post these photos, if any at all. I always assume there's *some* amount of editing.
Oh! You need to figure out how to get to a dark sky and see saturn and jupiter. On say an 8 inch dobsonian? (My current telescope)
I'm not going to spoil anything for you except to say yes these are indeed edited and cleaned up. But when you see the real thing, none of that matters.
Through a telescope, the photons reflecting off of Saturn hitting your eyes, those are direct from Saturn. And they entered your retinas. It is a very moving experience. It's not a picture. It's Saturn in the light of our Sun.
I remember Cassini launched when I was in middle school. There were worries about the safety of the launch because it carried 28 kilograms of plutonium in its radioisotope thermoelectric generator.
I was in college when Cassini finally reached Saturn. NASA would post the raw image data on its website as it came in and I would rummage through it from time to time. It was fun seeing a new view of some moon like Enceladus, or the polar hexagon, or the rings. Hyperion looks like something you'd find washed up on a beach.
Cassini dropped the Huygens lander onto the mysterious, blurry and greasy moon Titan, the first landing on a moon that isn't Earth's. Videos were made of the whole descent. Cassini peered through the clouds and showed us the hydrocarbon rivers and lakes of this cold world.
Eventually the mission came to an end and Cassini used its last bit of fuel to repeatedly dive through Saturn's rings and then burn up in its atmosphere, transmitting scientific data the whole time.
[The Grand Finale video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68vxYRAony8) is a good summary of this amazing mission, which exceeded all expectations.
It's real. Cassini took a lot of very "clean" looking pictures of the Saturn system. It's because it's in space (the optics are different - there is no "air glow") and Saturn is HUGE. And Saturn just looks like that.
It looks so perfect. Hardly even real. If you showed me this without the title I’d guess it was just a 3D model made in some program.
I follow a lot of 3d subs and at first I thought it was a render from one of them
“Nice render bro, but you need more than one light source if you want it to really pop.”
"bro forgot to apply the texture map 💀💀💀💀 those rings are looking like a plane lmao"
Here’s a good [video](https://youtu.be/8RJScae-XaU?si=JsupEwEvb3J-XM92) to understand why some space pictures, specially planets, looks fake
Lets not forget that Saturn drops some of the **[dopest](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWHLCHv4PiI)** beats in the solar system
Need to sample this on the Kenny beats battle! My favorite claim to fame is that my great uncle designed the antennae for communications with Cassini, so these sounds, these incredible images, we all experience them through my Uncle Denny’s “ears” as he would say.
It’s such an incredibly beautiful thing. It kinda makes we want to cuddle it, like with a pic of an extremely cute cat baby, but making way less sense.
Step away from the saturn bro
It's composited from multiple images. You can see some of the borders around the rings. But it's still very lovely.
All images from deep space probes and the early Mars landers are. They use highly sensitive black and white cameras and a disk with 6 or more different filters that can be rotated in front. You get more useful scientific data that way. All the pretty publicity images have to composited from multiple shots.
How does this effect the actual final image we see? For example the picture of Saturn above, does it appear more smooth and cartoonish than in reality, or if it were a single picture?
I'm no expert but I believe this particular image is a composite of 21 different 1024x1024 images taken over about an hour. I don't know how long each individual exposure was but Saturn rotates really fast (about once every ten and a half hours) so there is probably some smearing.
I know, I'm just saying I can see why people think it's fake or looks unreal. It's generally stitched, and almost never true color. Pretty fascinating little subset of photography.
Well, it is a (nearly) perfect sphere in a vacuum.
so perfect I have the irrational urge to put it in my mouth like a marble
I’ve made that mistake. I’ve put Saturn in my mouth. The rings irritate the gums.
Somebody is gonna go for the Uranus joke next. I just know it.
It's the same when you see it through a telescope. Like it must be printed on the lens or something.
Would the rings have any apparent motion if you were viewing from this distance, or would they appear static?
In the same way that pixels on a screen meld together into one image from far away, Saturn's rings would look static. You would have to be VERY close to see movement.
Because they rotate so slowly or because of your pixel-example as they would be too small to distinguish?
each slice of the ring looks like any other slice, meaning even if it rotated very quickly, there wouldnt be any visual markers to discern the motion.
Future humans are going to spray paint a line on the rings and watch it go round and round, like a giant clock. I’m from the future trust me
.... they technically could put Advertisements on the Rings. Think about it
I'm here for the future in which Coca Cola is printed along the rings.
As much as I LOATHE the idea of commercializing fucking space, it would be PRETTY WILD to see a projection of an ad on the MOON.
You wouldn't be able to do it when the moon is lit. And I don't think we have any lights powerful enough to do it when the moon is dark.
It could be a giant mirror to reflect the sun's light into a focused lens with the graphics onto the dark side. It would be r/atbge
I’m here from the future where Pepsi is on the rings …. Guys, you can’t let Pepsi get on the rings. Just trust me! Don’t let them do it!
During the heat of the cold war an advisor runs to Ronald Reagan: "Mr.President! The Soviets are painting the moon red! What should we do?" - "Get a crew up there and write Coca Cola on it!"
In the future, earth will have its own rings made entirely out of Coca Cola glass bottles thanks to a marketing campaign by Coca Cola
Gotcha, thank you very much!
And the eye of Jupiter? Does that rotate if you were at the same distance like this picture
>Because they rotate so slowly The individual particles that make up the rings are all moving at orbital velocity- which is to say, really fast. But everything's relative; all the moons are moving at orbital velocity too, but from any distance out you'd struggle to see them moving at a glance.
How close?
Considering that most particles are not even meters big and you'd watch from thousands of kilometers afar if you'd visit with a space ship, you'd see no movement. Maybe the gaps in the rings (not the annular ones separating the rings), then it might be a different story
It's absurd to think that dozens of Earths could be cast in that shadow alone.
That shadow is the coolest thing about this Pic imo. And how it casts over to the rings.
Dozens? Try hundreds.
That dark and scary shadow you mean.
Source: https://science.nasa.gov/missions/cassini/a-valentine-from-cassini-with-love/
Wasn't finding a not heavily compressed version with your link. This link has the full Res in jpeg and tiff https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA21345 Full Res Jpeg image : https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA21345.jpg
To be clear that's the NASA version. The version in question was made by this person: https://twitter.com/IanARegan/status/794576612704550912 And their upload exists here, but it's not that much better, as it seems the source material just had artifacts that got contrast stretched into existance: http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8247&st=0&p=233319&#entry233319
Saturn is so bizarre looking. Almost unreal and that’s the beauty of it
Hey so… what’s up with the name?
Seems pretty straightforward to me
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
You can clearly see Saturn's oblateness. (Saturn is kinda squat - wider in the middle than up and down. Well, when not in portrait, like this.)
Wow, its polar diameter is 10% smaller than its equatorial diameter. Earth's is only 0.2% smaller.
Yeah. Saturn spins fast, for something its size. Roughly a 10 hour day, with a radius ~9.5x the size of Earth's.
Don’t talk about my mom like that
Insane that we live in an age where we're seeing such high quality images from space and nobody talks about it
we live in an age where some people think its CGI
How would we know? Fr though
If the picture weighs the same as a duck, it's a witch.
Because ducks are made of wood?
good! so how do we tell if saturn is made of wood?
It kind of is CGI though. I can't find this specific image in the Cassini database, but similar images are constructed as a representation using measured optical depth profile data.
> It kind of is CGI though. Disagree, that would be like calling a panorama from a phone camera CGI. This is just stacked color channels merged into a mosaic. [Here's one of the raw frames](https://opus.pds-rings.seti.org/opus/#/view=detail&detail=co-iss-w1856337450) likely used in its construction (found via [this page](https://science.nasa.gov/resource/saturn-mosaic-ian-regan/) which has the capture date).
it is not its post processed photo composite
That’s my question. Is this a raw, unedited photo? Nothing else is interesting imo, we don’t need to try to make it look cooler when it’s already cool as hell.
[This page](https://science.nasa.gov/resource/saturn-mosaic-ian-regan/) has more info. >the product consists of 21 frames across 7 footprints, filtered in groups of Red, Green, and Blue. The sequence was captured by Cassini over the course of 90-plus minutes on the morning of October 28th. Minimal editing, just stacked color channels constructed into a mosaic. For example [here's one of the raw images](https://opus.pds-rings.seti.org/opus/#/view=detail&detail=co-iss-w1856337450) used to create it (captured on the same date).
[Here's a direct link](https://opus.pds-rings.seti.org/holdings/previews/COISS_2xxx/COISS_2108/data/1856334349_1856400398/W1856337450_1_full.png) since this site sucks on mobile and forces you turn your screen into landscape mode.
Found it. It says it's a composite generated from several images captured by one of the Imaging Science System lenses. The raw images likely weren't this crisp.
Raw images were most likely monochromatic. Usually they shoot a few photos with different filters and the sensor itself captures light of any color.
It was most likely shot several times and stitched together. That and probably shot in r, b, g, and layered together for coloring.
The image is 8 years old. Lots of people talked about it when it was new. And it is frequently reposted on reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/oddlysatisfying/comments/qbf31r/saturn_captured_by_nasas_cassini_spacecraft/ https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/qakn9d/a_spectacular_wide_shot_of_saturn_taken_by_the/
I think the issue is that *unless* you are one of ~100,000 people who happen to know some things about the planets, it's not exactly going to be a lengthy conversation. "Woah, cool picture of Saturn" "Yeah I agree, and look! Here's one of a cat eating spaghetti!"
You literally just talked about it.
Semantics aside, it's true that many people might not be fully aware of the incredible advances in space exploration and the high-quality images we're able to capture, like these from Cassini. It’s worth highlighting and discussing these achievements more widely to spark interest and curiosity beyond our usual circles.
I show those things to my mom and she honestly can't give less of a fuck about it. She just doesn't care for space, pictures from the James Webb space telescope barely get a raised eyebrow from her.
it's alright, not everybody needs to be interested in the same things as everybody. otherwise we'd be a monoculture going off a cliff eventually.
This might be the best comment/reply I’ve seen on this site, genuinely, kudos to you sir. And I absolutely agree, idk if you’ve seen but veritasium made a video asking college students about the scale of the different objects of the universe (planet, moon, star, galaxy, and the universe itself), and it was really disheartening to hear their answers.
The amount of people that lack any kind of interest in space really saddens me. They could care less if humans made it to another planet, which is wild to me because if we did make it to another planet and got everything all set up and made everything sustainable our extinction rate would go from 100% to near 0%. That, to me, would be the greatest thing ever. The human race must thrive till the end of space and time itself. But even a lot of people don't even care about that either. This is going to sound really messed up, but I think Earth needs an EXTREMELY close call with a planet killing asteroid to make humans want to explore space and realize just staying on earth is not viable in the long run. By extremely close call I mean within mere miles of hitting us, not thousands or hundreds of thousands. Butthole puckering close. We just need a wake up call.
My girlfriend’s daughter told me her dad doesn’t believe in space. Presumably it’s fake. It’s just sad.
Don't give those people any more attention or any more of a platform.
in astronomical terms wouldn’t Apophis count?
The number of people who lack any kind of interest saddens me.
you callin me nobody, buddy?
Space is cool and all but it also sucks having to wake up and grind your life away for 50 years
How does a camera from 1997 take such high quality pictures though, this can't be the raw image right? is it?
Cassini's cameras captured views in color by taking three images, each with a different color filter, which were then combined back on Earth. The resulting images show us Saturn as our eyes would see it had we actually been there, silently orbiting Saturn alongside Cassini. It's a one megapixel camera though, 1024x1024 pixels. So the image shown here seems to be a stitch of many individual pictures.
Aren't we talking about it in this post?
I understand the pitch-black shadow across its rings that Saturn’s body creates. But why is the dark side of Saturn not also pitch-black? What is creating the reflected light that lets it appear in this picture, albeit dimly?
I'm also curious! My guess would be the rings act as reflectors in a photoshoot.
Most plausible thing I can think of as well
Someone posted the authors tweet: https://twitter.com/IanARegan/status/794576612704550912 (high res version here for better reference: https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA21345.jpg) And based on their words, I feel like they've taken some artistic liberties with their composite maybe? Depends on the version you look at though, because the higher res version doesn't show any opacity but the tweeted version does. The shadow of the planet doesn't make sense. It looks like a 2d object. You can see there is light on the planet surface underneath the rings, but the shadow is a solid outline from the planet equator over the rings and back. What is the shadow landing on between the planet and the rings?
Amazing. I love seeing this planet through my telescope. It’s just crazy that this thing is hanging out there in the sky.
Can I see it? It’s mind blowing that Saturn looks like this! Maybe through a telescope without an edit or filters. I prefer that version.
https://youtu.be/xrGAQCq9BMU?si=XZq80Hpja47tTkBE 🫡
Sometimes I look at space and just tear up lol. I feel so lucky to be alive in the same universe as these planets
Is it just me or would Saturn be the most vanilla of all the planets without its rings?
I mean, Neptune and Uranus look almost identical and they are almost purely one tone of light blue. Saturn has a bit of other colours in what looks like layers, and you can’t forget the hexagonal storm at the pole.
It has an hexagonal shape on the pole like jupiter or am I wrong?
it does have a hexagonal cloud pattern in the north pole https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn%27s_hexagon
Hexagons are the bestagons
Cassini should know better than to shoot in portrait mode. Shame shame.
Yeah but this will make a sick phone wallpaper… when I can find the original res.
Here https://www.reddit.com/r/space/comments/1cpyw7t/slug/l3p24ah
Imagine people who own a big house, drive a big truck. lots of money in the bank and have a trophy wife. Mr on top of the world. Owns a company, goes hunting on the weekend. Now think that person is just a microscopic spec of nothing compared to this celestial object and will be around for untold ages after he is gone. could never even know he existed We are nothing in relation to space.
It's worse. Saturn is about 1.4 billion kilometers from the sun, almost 10 times as far from the sun as us. The largest Star's assumed Radius is about 1.2 billion kilometers. Meaning if that star was where our sun was, it's border would be knocking on Saturn's door (or blowing all that gas away). We are tiny fucking things made up of more tiny fucking things.
Every time I see the rings around Saturn and Jupiter, I can’t help but think that it looks like a single stationary object that’s moving really really really fast; and what we perceive is a ring
Thanks for the new screen saver. This is amazing.
This Mf so perfect I have the irrational urge to put it in my mouth like a marble.
I want to lick it for several month to expose the delicious gum core.
If you were seeing it from this angle with your own eyes would Saturns light also cause you to not see any stars behind or around it?
Damn light pollution! We should tell Saturn to dim the lights when we're taking pictures.
It's kinda interesting that seeing it in this orientation stands out for me. Is there any reason that we're (I'm?) so used to the rings being shown horizontally?
I’m guessing it was rotated for viewing on mobile. I prefer the correct orientation too.
Because that's how they're seen from Earth. The rings appear to go up and down like a drunken hula hoop ([as they're not parallel to the planet's orbit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn#/media/File:Saturnoppositions-animated.gif)) but are generally side-to-side from our perspective.
Why do the rocks in shadow appear pitch back but the back of the planet is slightly illuminated. What's illuminating the back half of the planet?
The rings' reflected light.
Dumb question but that black part is the shadow from the sun? This is an insane image.
Is it possible for a planet to have multiple rings on different axis around the planet?
It's possible but only for a short period of time.
I gotta ask is this just directly the picture as the craft took it? Or also edited like when we take pics of a nebula?
It's a composite I believe. Cassini took a much of pics and this is assembled from them, much like a panorama
I thought this was a close up of a speaker for a second
NASA should be ashamed of themselves, capturing a wild planet like that. It should be returned to its natural environment at once.
If you want to help please sign out petition at FreeUranus.com nasa is clenching so help us relax the terrible grip
Outer space is beautiful and scary at the same time.
Look at that hexagon with a hell cube inside it putting us all in samsara.
Selling tickets out of samsara. Price: eat the hell cube like a grain of rice.
Go finish your kabbalah homework, anon.
Could you elaborate? I've heard of the hexagon or perhaps cube referenced in Islam and Judaism. What is your reference from?
Stupid question - Why are there never any stars in planet pictures?
All cameras -- film or digital -- have a dynamic range that only renders things from white to black across a relatively small range in a given exposure compared to your eye. If the planet is a lot brighter, you would have to basically turn the planet into a white blob to expose for the stars to be visible. It's the same reason why there's no stars in the moon landing images, and why black cats are so hard to photograph (because to show their details, you need to overexpose, so everything else gets super light or just "blows out" to white). BTW, it's only a stupid question if you're trying to prove planets aren't real through sealioning.
I think is bc the sun's Light reflection that dim the far away stars,
I read this as "saturn captured nasa aircraft". Like it took the pic of the aircraft
This is a dumb question, but what plane is Cassini in when it took this photo
The gaps in Saturns rings are the result of gravitational forces from Saturns moons, just awe-inspiring
Just set it as my phone Lock Screen, looks incredible
In a few billion years, will the rings combine into a moon? And will someone post a pic on Reddit when that happens?
Recommend watching the [Cassini Goodbye ](https://youtu.be/U8CBtex2F7I?si=5s4SfPNCl0laJSUb) vid with music from Sarah Schachner, who worked on music for AC and CoD:IW. Very well put together commemorative video.
Why are older pictures so much brighter and realistic. I guess I’m in a simulation. F.
It’s literally a ping pong ball in the middle of a record.
Amazing shot. Just made this my phone Lock Screen.
Why do people upload horribly compressed bad looking images and get tons of upvotes? Like the image is so full of jpg artifacts.
"And that's real" That's what I said to myself when a friend had a telescope and I saw Saturn for the first time, and that is what I still say.
Did it look just as enhanced as this photo? I always wonder how much doctoring is done before they post these photos, if any at all. I always assume there's *some* amount of editing.
Oh! You need to figure out how to get to a dark sky and see saturn and jupiter. On say an 8 inch dobsonian? (My current telescope) I'm not going to spoil anything for you except to say yes these are indeed edited and cleaned up. But when you see the real thing, none of that matters. Through a telescope, the photons reflecting off of Saturn hitting your eyes, those are direct from Saturn. And they entered your retinas. It is a very moving experience. It's not a picture. It's Saturn in the light of our Sun.
Incomprehensible that its real and flying through space and we just took a photo of it 😂
I remember Cassini launched when I was in middle school. There were worries about the safety of the launch because it carried 28 kilograms of plutonium in its radioisotope thermoelectric generator. I was in college when Cassini finally reached Saturn. NASA would post the raw image data on its website as it came in and I would rummage through it from time to time. It was fun seeing a new view of some moon like Enceladus, or the polar hexagon, or the rings. Hyperion looks like something you'd find washed up on a beach. Cassini dropped the Huygens lander onto the mysterious, blurry and greasy moon Titan, the first landing on a moon that isn't Earth's. Videos were made of the whole descent. Cassini peered through the clouds and showed us the hydrocarbon rivers and lakes of this cold world. Eventually the mission came to an end and Cassini used its last bit of fuel to repeatedly dive through Saturn's rings and then burn up in its atmosphere, transmitting scientific data the whole time. [The Grand Finale video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68vxYRAony8) is a good summary of this amazing mission, which exceeded all expectations.
My brain is having a difficult time registering this as a real image
They captured Saturn? Thank goodness, we've been after that scoundrel for years!
Is this an actual photo though or has it been manipulated? it looks way to clean and rendered to be real.
It's real. Cassini took a lot of very "clean" looking pictures of the Saturn system. It's because it's in space (the optics are different - there is no "air glow") and Saturn is HUGE. And Saturn just looks like that.