Google Satellite images
-
I just found this image of an aeroplane coming in to land[^] on Google Maps. :)
My: Blog | Photos WDevs.com - Open Source Code Hosting, Blogs, FTP, Mail and More
-
I just found this image of an aeroplane coming in to land[^] on Google Maps. :)
My: Blog | Photos WDevs.com - Open Source Code Hosting, Blogs, FTP, Mail and More
-
Kind of a weird double exposure effect on the plane itself. The shadow is clear enough; I wonder why that happens?
I wondered if the double take was due to the plane's veocity, But why isn't their a second (ghost like) shadow ? Admittedly I know nothing about such things Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
-
I wondered if the double take was due to the plane's veocity, But why isn't their a second (ghost like) shadow ? Admittedly I know nothing about such things Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
My thoughts exactly. There's a technique called Time Domain Integration (IIRC) that can be used with 2D CCD arrays, where the charges accumulated in one row of cells are shifted in to the next row of cells, at the same rate as the object's image moves across the array as the image is scanned. Say the image falls on row 0 for a period of time; as the image moves to the next row, the array is clocked, allowing continued accumulation of the image. This technique allows for greater light-gathering capability than simply recording the contents of the whole 2D array at once. It may be that the clocking rate is synched to the rate at which the image of earth moves across the array. I was thinking that since the plane moves at a different rate as this process took place, it might result in multiple images. But why, as you note, doesn't the same thing happen to the shadow? :confused:
-
I just found this image of an aeroplane coming in to land[^] on Google Maps. :)
My: Blog | Photos WDevs.com - Open Source Code Hosting, Blogs, FTP, Mail and More
-
I wondered if the double take was due to the plane's veocity, But why isn't their a second (ghost like) shadow ? Admittedly I know nothing about such things Regardz Colin J Davies The most LinkedIn CPian (that I know of anyhow) :-)
ColinDavies wrote: Admittedly I know nothing about such things I know a few things about the subject and I am not sure. There is the time-domain imaging mentioned above. The best example is to look at a raw image from the NASA satelites (not processed, but live imaging off the satelites), they look like horizontal stripes of data fused into a single image. But I would think it would do the same to the aircraft as its shadow. The other possibility is overlaps. If this was taken with overlapping images and the plane happened to, by sheer chance fall into the overlap. You have a time delay from image one tile to image 2 tile as the satelite travels overhead. To get rid of exposure differences on images. Images are exposure matched (98% the way to complete match), and then edge blended for overlaps. However that would mean the plane should look the same color on either end of the aircraft since it is feathered into the terrain. And the image here looks like blue and red images are not time synced. The tail image looks red and the nose image looks blue. If it were an sensor misalignment, I would think the whole scene would look horrible. So I really don't know. But I don't deal with the hardware on satelites, so I don't know if any are taking sensor images separately of IR-NIR-R-G-B-UV layers (Infrared, near infrared, red, green, blue, ultraviolet). Maybe we caught a picture of a plane disappearing into a black hole? and given the speed of dark is faster than the speed of light (old joke), the shadow is unaffected. :) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Oh great, now I'll never get anything accomplished. :laugh:
Paul Lyons, CCPL
Certified Code Project Lurker -
Edge of I-hacked has the wrong location for Trinity Test site, unless there is another site with the same name.... Trinity is between Socorro, NM and Alamogordo, NM in the North end of White Sands Missile Range. Trinity Ground Zero[^] (the brown zone on the south edge of the circle is the public parking lot -- it opens to the public twice a year) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Edge of I-hacked has the wrong location for Trinity Test site, unless there is another site with the same name.... Trinity is between Socorro, NM and Alamogordo, NM in the North end of White Sands Missile Range. Trinity Ground Zero[^] (the brown zone on the south edge of the circle is the public parking lot -- it opens to the public twice a year) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
Jeff...you know it's weird that you know all this stuff, right? ;P
-
Jeff...you know it's weird that you know all this stuff, right? ;P
David Stone wrote: Jeff...you know it's weird that you know all this stuff, right? It's because... I went on the tour... yeah, that's the ticket. I went on the tour.... One of the other google sites had a comment from a person directing them to Trinity, they posted an image of one of the target areas on the Range. I kindly left a comment that they were looking at mowed ground cover, and posted the correct Trinity location. I wonder what excuse I could have for knowing that.... hmmm.... _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Kind of a weird double exposure effect on the plane itself. The shadow is clear enough; I wonder why that happens?
Did you note that the "picture" is actually 9 pictures and that the airplane and its shadow are on different segments -- the center segment (airplane in air) is probably a double exposure.