Sharpest Images With "Lucky" Telescope 165
igny writes "Astronomers from the University of Cambridge and Caltech have developed a new camera that gives much more detailed pictures of stars and nebulae than even the Hubble Space Telescope, and does it from the ground. A new technique called 'Lucky imaging' has been used to diminish atmospheric noise in the visible range, creating the most detailed pictures of the sky in history."
Lucky Imaging (Score:5, Insightful)
This technique is often used by amateur astrophotographers using newer CCD cameras and even webcams. Astronomy Picture Of the Day http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html [nasa.gov] is a great site to see this stuff. I haven't checked Googles pictures, but I am sure that there would be a number of them there, too.
The quality of some of these photos is amazing.
davel
Re:But surely... (Score:5, Insightful)
Exposure Time? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If they can do this from earth... (Score:4, Insightful)
Interesting but picture quality unjustified (Score:5, Insightful)
The technique they're using, while interesting, needs more justification.
I'm wary when I see people doing any selection on random data because there's the problem of selection bias; throwing away the hundred results that don't match what they want and keeping the one that does. Just getting an image that seems plausible is not good enough.
Their quality measure [cam.ac.uk] isn't one I'd use. They should be comparing the technique-plus-low-resolution-optics against high-resolution-optics directly. That is, doing image differencing of images taken at the same time and seeing what differences there are. They may well have good reason for assuming it's all okay but until somebody does that test they cannot assume they've removed all the variability that the atmosphere provides; there could be all sorts of hidden biases due to various atmospheric, molecular and statistical effects.
---
"Intellectual Property" is unspeak. All inventions are the result of intellect. A better name is ECI - easy copy items.
They've got two things going on at once here (Score:1, Insightful)
technique. Notice the before pictures in each case are wihtout adaptive optics and without the "lucky"
camera. The "after" images have both and EACH is likely to improve the image quality. I'd bet the adaptive
optics is doing most of it, but it's a pretty shoddy way to present the data.
Re:If they can do this from earth... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's adaptive optics. 'Lucky imaging' looks to be something different. Sounds like Lucky Imaging tries to catch and merge portions of the image that occasionally, by chance, make it through the ever changing atmosphere with minimal distortion.
But I think that the answer to the original question is probably still 'No" It doesn't sound like Lucky Imaging per se is an answer to the question "How can I see objects obscured by cosmic gas clouds?"
Reinvention (Score:3, Insightful)