Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
Darren- Your first assumption is the problem. The lens on the Pancam is f/20. Optical theory says that if this lens is perfect, the smallest size spot it can produce at the focal plane (the Airy disk) is 32um in diameter. By sampling at about half that size the sensor will capture all the spatial information present in the image. And indeed, the Pancam sensor has 16um pixels. The lens and the sensor are well matched to each other. Adding more pixels in the same area would not result in pictures of higher resolution, just the requirement for more bandwidth to send them. Of course, a higher resolution camera could be made. But that would require changing the optics as well as the sensor. And in the case of digital imaging like this, it is really only meaningful to talk about resolution in an angular sense, not in terms of the number of pixels. When we look at the image of this Martian meteorite, what we'd all like to see isn't more pixels as such, but more pixels across the meteorite itself. A lot of the one million pixels right now are imaging the area surrounding the meteorite. If the camera had a zoom lens, you could place nearly one million pixels right on the meteorite. That would be many times the resolution of the original image, with the same 1MP sensor. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 11:30 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo) I must be misunderstanding something fundamentally here, then. My assumptions are: 1.) the optics are precise enough to focus enough photons on the CCD to provide a sharp image to the CCD cells at the higher pixel density 2.) the CCD cells are able to capture enough photons at the higher pixel density/smaller pixel size to record a meaningful signal. Given those two assumptions (and neglecting for a moment that it may not fit the real-world situation) how can putting a 5 million pixel CCD of the same size as the 1 million pixel CCD in the place of the 1 million pixel CCD NOT collect five times as many points of information for the same image focused on it? Not talking about changing the focal length of the optics, just having a CCD that can sample the same focused optical image in much smaller segments. Are you saying that this would NOT give a better resolution, given the established meaning of image resolution as applies to digital camera image output? If so, I don't understand how. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 08:25:42 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: imaging like this, it is really only meaningful to talk about resolution in an angular sense, not in terms of the number of pixels. When we look at the I think the problem is that we were using two different meanings of the word resolution. For you, the one that matters (and that you were going by) is the one related to the density of information the lens can pick up (trying to avoid using the term resolve). But for me, working mostly with the output end, not the input end, resolution means the number of pixels, period (given, again, that the optics are good enough that the pixels are meaningful). Meaning, when I think of my monitor resolution, I think in the terms of it being 1600x1200, period, not 1600x1200 over a 19 inch diagonal surface. And, again, when I think of the resolution of the output of my camera, I think of it as 2560x1920, peroid, not 2560x1920 over a 2/3 inch CCD (which, at least according to a quick look at one source, is about 5 microns per CCD cell). So when the earlier poster asked about higer resolution photos being available in the context of wanting a large photographic print of the image, IMHO the response that the rover's CCD isn't very high resolution is the proper use of the term resolution as related to the issue of the size of photographic prints-- on the output end, it doesn't matter what the limits of the optics and CCD are-- what matters is that there are not and will not be enough meaningful pixels of information to get a good looking large print. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
The Other side says.20th Century Fox..prop made in China Jerry - Original Message - From: Sterling K. Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 2:57 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo) Hi, Assumption one is wrong. Basically, the PanCam is just about as good a camera as the $19.95 Samsung Digital Point'N'Shoot dangling from the discount store rack. The image is 512x512 by 32 bits deep (I presume) and that's your one megapixel. If everyone chips in for the ticket, I'll borrow my neighbor's 7 megapixel Canon and go take some pictures of it. Heck, I'd even take a picture of the other side of the rock. What does the other side look like anyway? Sterling K. Webb -- Darren Garrison wrote: On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:08:45 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Darren- Replacing the Pancam sensor with, say, a 5MP array wouldn't yield better resolution. If the physical size of the sensor were larger, you would have a greater field of view. But even if the sensor had smaller pixels, the resolution wouldn't increase because the simple, three element f/20 lens of the camera has a spot size of 32um, twice the current pixel size. So packing in more pixels would just be empty resolution- there would be no real increase in the amount of information available. A blown up image from this 5MP image would look the same as the image from the 1MP sensor after you resized it to 5MP. In this case, what we'd really like would be the ability of the Pancam to switch in a longer focal length lens. Maybe the next mission! I must be misunderstanding something fundamentally here, then. My assumptions are: 1.) the optics are precise enough to focus enough photons on the CCD to provide a sharp image to the CCD cells at the higher pixel density 2.) the CCD cells are able to capture enough photons at the higher pixel density/smaller pixel size to record a meaningful signal. Given those two assumptions (and neglecting for a moment that it may not fit the real-world situation) how can putting a 5 million pixel CCD of the same size as the 1 million pixel CCD in the place of the 1 million pixel CCD NOT collect five times as many points of information for the same image focused on it? Not talking about changing the focal length of the optics, just having a CCD that can sample the same focused optical image in much smaller segments. Are you saying that this would NOT give a better resolution, given the established meaning of image resolution as applies to digital camera image output? If so, I don't understand how. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
http://www.xenotechresearch.com/truecol1.htm Here is a nice text about color calibration of images from Mars -[ MARCIN CIMALA ]-[ I.M.C.A.#3667 ]- http://www.Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.PolandMET.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.Gao-Guenie.com GSM +48(607)535 195 [ Member of Polish Meteoritical Society ] __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 01:44:33 +0100, Meteoryt.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.xenotechresearch.com/truecol1.htm Here is a nice text about color calibration of images from Mars Hard to believe that something that well written and cogent came from such a complete and utter crackpot. (Just hit the back button on that page to see all of his claims of finding fossils of sea urchins, sand dollars, and trilobites in the rover photos. The guy is 51 cards short of a deck). __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/mer/images.cfm?id=1466 [Image] Iron Meteorite on Mars January 19, 2005 NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity has found an iron meteorite on Mars, the first meteorite of any type ever identified on another planet. The pitted, basketball-size object is mostly made of iron and nickel. Readings from spectrometers on the rover determined that composition. Opportunity used its panoramic camera to take the images used in this approximately true-color composite on the rover's 339th martian day, or sol (Jan. 6, 2005). This composite combines images taken through the panoramic camera's 600-nanometer (red), 530-nanometer (green), and 480-nanometer (blue) filters. Image Credit: NASA/JPL/Cornell __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
[meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
Hello Ron. What a cool color picture that is. Is there a possibility in the near future of a color print being published that a person could purchase? I for one would like to have one! Thanks for all the info that you provide to us! Dave http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/mer/images.cfm?id=1466 [Image] Iron Meteorite on Mars January 19, 2005 NASA's Mars Exploration Rover Opportunity has found an iron meteorite on Mars, the first meteorite of any type ever identified on another planet. The pitted, basketball-size object is mostly made of iron and nickel. Readings from spectrometers on the rover determined that composition. Opportunity used its panoramic camera to take the images used in this approximately true-color composite on the rover's 339th martian day, or sol (Jan. 6, 2005). This composite combines images taken through the panoramic camera's 600-nanometer (red), 530-nanometer (green), and 480-nanometer (blue) filters. Image Credit: NASA/JPL/Cornell __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
Wow! This is a much more convincing photo. Is there a HiRez color closeup? In this image, you don't see the facets and ridges so clearly as in the earlier one. Most interesting... Nick At 06:29 PM 1/19/2005, Dave Schultz wrote: Hello Ron. What a cool color picture that is. Is there a possibility in the near future of a color print being published that a person could purchase? I for one would like to have one! Thanks for all the info that you provide to us! Dave __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 18:29:25 -0800 (PST), Dave Schultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Ron. What a cool color picture that is. Is there a possibility in the near future of a color print being published that a person could purchase? I for one would like to have one! Thanks for all the info that you provide to us! I doubt that NASA has a higer-resolution version of the photo than they are releasing to the public. Why not simply send the photo to one of the many photo printing services on the internet (like www.dotphoto.com, www.shutterfly.com, and www.clubphoto.com) and buy a print from them? Or even take it on a CD to a local photo lab? __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
I doubt that NASA has a higer-resolution version of the photo than they are releasing to the public. Why not simply send the photo to one of the many photo printing services on the internet (like www.dotphoto.com, www.shutterfly.com, and www.clubphoto.com) and buy a print from them? Or even take it on a CD to a local photo lab? Greetings all, I hate to be a nay-sayer or anything of the likes. But, that picture sure looks like a cheap Photoshop copy-and-paste job. Here's the link again for you all that have filters or didn't look before: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/mer/images.cfm?id=1466 I'm sure it's due to the false color imaging to make it look natural or whatever. It just seems like the shadows don't match considering the ground soil and the meteorite itself. I'm quite certain I'm wrong in any insinuations above, but it doesn't look anything natural to me. I believe they have found an iron meteorite, but that picture doesn't look right to me. Maybe they are trying too hard to convince us??? Just my amateurish 2-cents worth, Dave __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
I have no trouble capturing, printing, editing any size photo in PhotoShop. I'd just like to see a color image with the resolution of the first BW image. I'd like to see it in the resolution they receive it in. It's likely that the ones released for public consumption are lower Rez. Are they? Nick __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:34:08 -0800, Nicholas Gessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to see it in the resolution they receive it in. It's likely that the ones released for public consumption are lower Rez. Are they? It can never be too very high in resolution-- the CCD is only 1 megapixel: http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/pancam_techwed_040114.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
The number of pixels has nothing to do with resolution. What matters is the size of each pixel and the focal length of the camera. In the case of the Pancam, that's 16um and 38mm, giving a resolution of about one arcminute- slightly better than the human eye. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 9:44 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo) On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:34:08 -0800, Nicholas Gessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to see it in the resolution they receive it in. It's likely that the ones released for public consumption are lower Rez. Are they? It can never be too very high in resolution-- the CCD is only 1 megapixel: http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/pancam_techwed_040114.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:18:33 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The number of pixels has nothing to do with resolution. What matters is the size of each pixel and the focal length of the camera. In the case of the Pancam, that's 16um and 38mm, giving a resolution of about one arcminute- slightly better than the human eye. Okay, then, cut the word resolution out of my reply and replace it with whichever word means total number of pixels available in the image, this being the factor-- assuming good optics-- that determines the size at which an image can be printed and still look good which is what 99 percent of people concider resolution to be, and will continue to do so (and hopefully this won't degrade into an argument similar to the recent ones on what magnetic means). Whichever word is used to mean what I obviously meant when I use resolution the same way most people use the word resolution, the CCDs on the rovers are only 1 megapixel-- which means that the photo will never be as high(whatever the word is that almost everyone else accepts as resolution) enough to make a large print that looks as sharp and detailed as would come from a film camera or higher-end digital camera. Yes, the one megapixel CCDs on the rovers are better than the 3ish megapixel camera on consumer-grade digitals, but the 10+ megapixel CCDs on pro models are better than the one megapixel CCDs on the rovers. And, IMHO, if I were somehow standing on Mars and my camera surviving the conditions, I think that my 5 megapixel Sony F707 would take a better picture (better meaning being of higher captured detail and able to be magnifed more and printed at a larger size and stil look good) than the composite color photo from the rover's CCD. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 9:44 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo) On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 20:34:08 -0800, Nicholas Gessler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to see it in the resolution they receive it in. It's likely that the ones released for public consumption are lower Rez. Are they? It can never be too very high in resolution-- the CCD is only 1 megapixel: http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/pancam_techwed_040114.html __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 00:46:07 -0500, Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:18:33 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The number of pixels has nothing to do with resolution. What matters is the size of each pixel and the focal length of the camera. In the case of the Pancam, that's 16um and 38mm, giving a resolution of about one arcminute- slightly better than the human eye. Okay, then, cut the word resolution out of my reply and replace it with whichever word means total number of pixels available in the image, this being the factor-- assuming good optics-- that determines the size at which an image can be printed and still look good Just as a follow-up, I found the correct word that goes in the place of my incorrectly used resolution. It is the word resolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution Image resolution From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The image resolution is a term that says something about how much image detail an image can hold. The term is most often used in relation to digital images, but is also used to describe how grainy a film-based image is. Higher resolution means more image detail. For digital raster-images, the convention is to describe the image resolution with the set of two positive integer-numbers, where the first number is the number of pixel-columns (width) and the second is the number of pixel-rows (height). The second most popular convention is to describe the total number of pixels in the image (typically given as number of megapixels), wich can be calculated by multiplying pixel-columns with pixel-rows. Other conventions include describing resolution per area-unit or resolution per length-unit such as pixels per inch. Below is an illustration of how the same image will appear at different resolutions. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
Hi Darren- Replacing the Pancam sensor with, say, a 5MP array wouldn't yield better resolution. If the physical size of the sensor were larger, you would have a greater field of view. But even if the sensor had smaller pixels, the resolution wouldn't increase because the simple, three element f/20 lens of the camera has a spot size of 32um, twice the current pixel size. So packing in more pixels would just be empty resolution- there would be no real increase in the amount of information available. A blown up image from this 5MP image would look the same as the image from the 1MP sensor after you resized it to 5MP. In this case, what we'd really like would be the ability of the Pancam to switch in a longer focal length lens. Maybe the next mission! Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo) On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 22:18:33 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The number of pixels has nothing to do with resolution. What matters is the size of each pixel and the focal length of the camera. In the case of the Pancam, that's 16um and 38mm, giving a resolution of about one arcminute- slightly better than the human eye. Okay, then, cut the word resolution out of my reply and replace it with whichever word means total number of pixels available in the image, this being the factor-- assuming good optics-- that determines the size at which an image can be printed and still look good which is what 99 percent of people concider resolution to be, and will continue to do so (and hopefully this won't degrade into an argument similar to the recent ones on what magnetic means). Whichever word is used to mean what I obviously meant when I use resolution the same way most people use the word resolution, the CCDs on the rovers are only 1 megapixel-- which means that the photo will never be as high(whatever the word is that almost everyone else accepts as resolution) enough to make a large print that looks as sharp and detailed as would come from a film camera or higher-end digital camera. Yes, the one megapixel CCDs on the rovers are better than the 3ish megapixel camera on consumer-grade digitals, but the 10+ megapixel CCDs on pro models are better than the one megapixel CCDs on the rovers. And, IMHO, if I were somehow standing on Mars and my camera surviving the conditions, I think that my 5 megapixel Sony F707 would take a better picture (better meaning being of higher captured detail and able to be magnifed more and printed at a larger size and stil look good) than the composite color photo from the rover's CCD. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
But it isn't the correct definition in this case, because it is the optics that is limiting the information content, not the number or density of the pixels on the sensor. Chris * Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com - Original Message - From: Darren Garrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo) Just as a follow-up, I found the correct word that goes in the place of my incorrectly used resolution. It is the word resolution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:08:45 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Darren- Replacing the Pancam sensor with, say, a 5MP array wouldn't yield better resolution. If the physical size of the sensor were larger, you would have a greater field of view. But even if the sensor had smaller pixels, the resolution wouldn't increase because the simple, three element f/20 lens of the camera has a spot size of 32um, twice the current pixel size. So packing in more pixels would just be empty resolution- there would be no real increase in the amount of information available. A blown up image from this 5MP image would look the same as the image from the 1MP sensor after you resized it to 5MP. In this case, what we'd really like would be the ability of the Pancam to switch in a longer focal length lens. Maybe the next mission! I must be misunderstanding something fundamentally here, then. My assumptions are: 1.) the optics are precise enough to focus enough photons on the CCD to provide a sharp image to the CCD cells at the higher pixel density 2.) the CCD cells are able to capture enough photons at the higher pixel density/smaller pixel size to record a meaningful signal. Given those two assumptions (and neglecting for a moment that it may not fit the real-world situation) how can putting a 5 million pixel CCD of the same size as the 1 million pixel CCD in the place of the 1 million pixel CCD NOT collect five times as many points of information for the same image focused on it? Not talking about changing the focal length of the optics, just having a CCD that can sample the same focused optical image in much smaller segments. Are you saying that this would NOT give a better resolution, given the established meaning of image resolution as applies to digital camera image output? If so, I don't understand how. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Re: [meteorite-list] Iron Meteorite on Mars (Color Photo)
Hi, Assumption one is wrong. Basically, the PanCam is just about as good a camera as the $19.95 Samsung Digital Point'N'Shoot dangling from the discount store rack. The image is 512x512 by 32 bits deep (I presume) and that's your one megapixel. If everyone chips in for the ticket, I'll borrow my neighbor's 7 megapixel Canon and go take some pictures of it. Heck, I'd even take a picture of the other side of the rock. What does the other side look like anyway? Sterling K. Webb -- Darren Garrison wrote: On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:08:45 -0700, Chris Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Darren- Replacing the Pancam sensor with, say, a 5MP array wouldn't yield better resolution. If the physical size of the sensor were larger, you would have a greater field of view. But even if the sensor had smaller pixels, the resolution wouldn't increase because the simple, three element f/20 lens of the camera has a spot size of 32um, twice the current pixel size. So packing in more pixels would just be empty resolution- there would be no real increase in the amount of information available. A blown up image from this 5MP image would look the same as the image from the 1MP sensor after you resized it to 5MP. In this case, what we'd really like would be the ability of the Pancam to switch in a longer focal length lens. Maybe the next mission! I must be misunderstanding something fundamentally here, then. My assumptions are: 1.) the optics are precise enough to focus enough photons on the CCD to provide a sharp image to the CCD cells at the higher pixel density 2.) the CCD cells are able to capture enough photons at the higher pixel density/smaller pixel size to record a meaningful signal. Given those two assumptions (and neglecting for a moment that it may not fit the real-world situation) how can putting a 5 million pixel CCD of the same size as the 1 million pixel CCD in the place of the 1 million pixel CCD NOT collect five times as many points of information for the same image focused on it? Not talking about changing the focal length of the optics, just having a CCD that can sample the same focused optical image in much smaller segments. Are you saying that this would NOT give a better resolution, given the established meaning of image resolution as applies to digital camera image output? If so, I don't understand how. __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list __ Meteorite-list mailing list Meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
