Hi all:

I'm having fun playing with spectral data, media and functions. Not that 
I know what I'm doing... but it looks nice and somewhat similar to real 
planetray nebulae. My apologies to the astronomers out there... it is 
surely not very astrophotorealist.


--
Jaime

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'nebulae-6.jpg' (23 KB) Download 'nebulae-7.jpg' (19 KB) Download 'nebulae-8.jpg' (20 KB)

Preview of image 'nebulae-6.jpg'

Preview of image 'nebulae-7.jpg'

Preview of image 'nebulae-8.jpg'

"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote in message
news:40366397@news.povray.org...
> Hi all:
>
> I'm having fun playing with spectral data, media and functions. Not that
> I know what I'm doing... but it looks nice and somewhat similar to real
> planetray nebulae. My apologies to the astronomers out there... it is
> surely not very astrophotorealist.

Beautiful! I could see these being posters! :-)

Post a reply to this message

There's not really much photorealism in astro photos as apart from the
optical ones they all use false colours anyway. Perhaps these use a
different colour table to most but that's allright!

"Dan P" <dan### [at] yahoocom> wrote in message
news:40366667@news.povray.org...
>
> "Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote in message
> news:40366397@news.povray.org...
> > Hi all:
> >
> > I'm having fun playing with spectral data, media and functions. Not that
> > I know what I'm doing... but it looks nice and somewhat similar to real
> > planetray nebulae. My apologies to the astronomers out there... it is
> > surely not very astrophotorealist.
>
> Beautiful! I could see these being posters! :-)
>
>

Post a reply to this message

Among other things, Nickj wrote:

> There's not really much photorealism in astro photos as apart from the
> optical ones they all use false colours anyway. Perhaps these use a
> different colour table to most but that's allright!

And anyway, optical photographs have such a magnification and sensitivity 
they're are completely unrecognizable from naked-eye experience or even 
with telescope aid. Moreover, there's quite a wide range of techniques, 
emulsions, instruments... almost anything could be "astrophotorealistic", 
meaning it looks like some kind of astronomy picture :)

-- 
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby

Post a reply to this message

Hi Jaime

I like these scenes. Good enough for wallpaper :)

They remind me of the "Cats eye nebula" with the bright star in the
center.

Alf

Post a reply to this message

In article <40376b93@news.povray.org>,
 "Nickj" <nad### [at] yahoocouk> wrote:

> There's not really much photorealism in astro photos as apart from the
> optical ones they all use false colours anyway. Perhaps these use a
> different colour table to most but that's allright!

Technically, most are as "photorealistic" as any other color photo, we 
just lack the technology to properly display them and the proper senses 
to perceive them. Most astronometric photos simply use each frequency as 
a different color channel...for example, infrared as red, the green 
shade the eye responds most strongly to as green, and ultraviolet as 
blue. Or green, ultraviolet, xray, or microwave, infrared, ultraviolet. 
Or they will use the strength of a set of emission lines...hydrogen, 
oxygen, carbon, etc. Images where they map a single intensity to a color 
map usually aren't as visually interesting or attractive.

-- 
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/

Post a reply to this message

"Jaime Vives Piqueres" <jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote in message
news:40366397@news.povray.org...

lol. Clever title. These look nice, but I think the fake-looking stars
destroy the effect.

 -Shay

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 20:44:16 +0100, Jaime Vives Piqueres
<jai### [at] ignoranciaorg> wrote:

>I'm having fun playing with spectral data, media and functions. Not that 
>I know what I'm doing... but it looks nice and somewhat similar to real 
>planetray nebulae. My apologies to the astronomers out there... it is 
>surely not very astrophotorealist.

No apologies necessary.  The "realism" of an astrophoto depends a lot
on the film or CCD, the filters used, how adept the photographer is
with PhotoShop, and in the case of emission nebulae such as
planetaries, which color you assign to each spectral line.

The colors i see in most photos of planetaries are red and cyan, which
are probably what we would see if our eyes were sensitive enough.
Your renderings look more like Hubble shots, which aren't necessarily
intended to look "true color," whatever that might be.

For those of you who don't know, beautiful astrophotos bear little
resemblance to what our eyes perceive, which makes the very concept of
photorealism in astrophotography rather slippery.  (If you got a
telescope for Christmas and are disappointed with the view, don't
blame the telescope; blame the marketers.  And throw away the 4mm
eyepiece; it's useless.)

FWIW, one planetary that does appear in color to my eyes is the Saturn
Nebula (NGC 7009) in Aquarius.  If you have one of those new
roboscopes, such as the Nexstar or ETX, it is almost certainly in the
telescope's database, but you'll have to wait a few months before it
becomes visible in the morning skies again.

-- 
------------------- Richard Callwood III --------------------
~  U.S. Virgin Islands    ~  USDA zone 11  ~  18.3N, 64.9W  ~
~  eastern Massachusetts  ~  USDA zone 6 (1992-95)          ~
--------------- http://cac.uvi.edu/staff/rc3/ ---------------

Post a reply to this message

"Galactic Lips"

Post a reply to this message

"Apache" <apa### [at] hotmailcom> wrote in message
news:403a7c54@news.povray.org...
> "Galactic Lips"

... make for one hell of a kiss.

Post a reply to this message