Live data from Hacker News

I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

reddit.com

111–119 of 119 posts

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#111
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can download/share via webtorrent https://instant.io/#4f9178e5e89d5ec55fb3345d8f52627c23d39ce9

If only we had something like imgur but the images were stored on bittorrent network.That would be great.

This could work, but where would we serve the ads from?

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#112
post #22

The image is 9000 x 9000 pixels. Future proofing for my own-it-someday 8K monitor background.

I tried opening the image, but it made my entire laptop unresponsive[1]. So let's hope the graphics manufacturers catch up with the pixel trent before those 8K monitors become mainstream. [1] On Chrome for MacOS. Granted my macbook is a couple years old, and the Apple graphics drivers are garbage.

I was able to zoom in on the full resolution. Granted, it wasn't snappy, but not unbearable either. I'm on a 2013 13" retina and current Chrome.

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#113
post #109
post #90

Becausr the full-res version links went down often yesterday, I'm hosting it on my IPFS node, here's the link (for those on IPFS, if you can afford the bandwidth please pin it to spread the load :) ) https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmVLTMHtLRhnft3QspDx4qTJeXY6hiib1j77UfQ... Also made it available in torrent form (with the IPFS URL as a web seed) http://www.urlhash.com/124410/mosaic.png.torrent

I've got plenty of bandwidth on my server - http://files.jjcm.org/mosaic.png if anyone needs a non-ipfs / magnet link :) Alternatively, if you have a slower connection I made a lossless webp here which should result in the same output at about 1/10th the size: http://files.jjcm.org/mosaic.webp

Loading this image brings me back to the days of my 2400 BAUD modem.

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#115
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've got plenty of bandwidth on my server - http://files.jjcm.org/mosaic.png if anyone needs a non-ipfs / magnet link :) Alternatively, if you have a slower connection I made a lossless webp here which should result in the same output at about 1/10th the size: http://files.jjcm.org/mosaic.webp

Loading this image brings me back to the days of my 2400 BAUD modem.

youtu.be/ckc6XSSh52w?t=44

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#116
post #90

Becausr the full-res version links went down often yesterday, I'm hosting it on my IPFS node, here's the link (for those on IPFS, if you can afford the bandwidth please pin it to spread the load :) ) https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmVLTMHtLRhnft3QspDx4qTJeXY6hiib1j77UfQ... Also made it available in torrent form (with the IPFS URL as a web seed) http://www.urlhash.com/124410/mosaic.png.torrent

Here's another mirror, hosted on B2 + Cloudflare: https://i-cdn.jacobhands.com/lwd3q/mosaic.png

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox works great, as others have mentioned.

Have you tried OpenSeadragon? I feel like I have been casting pearls at swines here.

Openseadragon may make sense for huge images, not for merely large ones as this one, that fits comfortably in memory. Besides, not everyone is keen on using "web-based" programs just because.

Re: I took 50k images of the night sky to make an 81 Megapixel image of the moon

#118
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A quick word of caution. For anyone who might be interested in astrophotography I really wouldn't recommend any of the tutorials on the clark-vision site. This is what the co-author of an astronomical image processing program had to say about them: http://forum.startools.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=912 "The "articles" exhibit a litany of errors, nonsense and misunderstandings of how some basic algorithms and mathematical…

This can definitely be true and I personally find that the writing style of Clark's tutorials could use some polish -- his random switches between scientific and colloquial styles within a single tutorial can annoy both engineers and artists. I also heard that he does not like debate that he deems repetitive and is not be the friendliest opponent to his critics. That said, the criticism above is very scarce on detail…

> That said, the criticism above is very scarce on details. What exactly is the nonsense about mathematical concepts that he is objecting to?

There are examples in the thread I linked to.

> But the strongest argument going for Clark, IMO, is his stunning pictures.

I've seen countless amateurs produce far better images with much cheaper equipment. He also misses the point of modding cameras, improving Ha sensitivity allows more structure to be captured. A case in point, this is my quick and cheap North America nebula with an old modded DSLR and Ha filter: https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4490/37423232795_8a37a7ecbf_h....

My colour image isn't great but it shows a great deal more structure than Mr Clark's, despite using the same 200mm camera lens and less exposure time: https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/593/22026540174_273c7ffa8b_b.j...

For comparison: http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.astrophoto-1/we...

Post reply on HN