There is something uncanny about the bandwidth and quality of all the artifacts coming from this mission.

I've subsisted on photos from the Apollo missions and artistic renditions for so long that seeing the modern, high resolution real thing to be quite stirring in a way I didn't expect. It actually does make me believe that the future could be quite cool.

▲

dylan604 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We haven't even seen the full quality images yet. They've commented that the live feed from the GoPro is a limited bandwidth because they have to share the bandwidth with running the capsule. The images from the Nikons onboard are just scaled down. My initial guess was from an export specifically to get an early dump to get everyone on the ground chomping at the bit something to see. They'll get the full images when the SD cards splash down. When those are released, I'm expecting quite a few OMG images

▲

zamadatix 10 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I wouldn't mind some raw files but I honestly don't think they'll be too strikingly different than these (make sure you're looking at the full 20 MP images which should be several MB, not the 2 MP previews at ~200 KB).

	▲	dylan604 7 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't know what the Lightroom* skillz of the astronauts are, but I would not be surprised if they were shooting RAW+JPEG and only processed the JPGs in Lightroom. They probably had presets to export to smaller images that was created months ago and loaded onto their PCDs. I'd imagine 4 humans in a tincan have more things to do than to be developing RAW images by digging out the details in the shadows, push the exposure and pull back the highlights, and then apply all of those settings to each sequence of images. They'll let the folks on the ground do that. * The exif data has Adobe Lightroom Classic (Windows) metadata in it.
	▲	geerlingguy 10 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The raw files have a ton more dynamic range, however. You could pull out a lot more detail in shadows.

▲

madrox 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

That’s really exciting!

▲

JumpCrisscross 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> something uncanny about the bandwidth and quality of all the artifacts coming from this mission

Back in 2019, Robert Zubrin suggested using rovers "to do detailed photography of the [Moon] base area and its surroundings" to "ultimately form the basis of a virtual reality experience that will allow millions of members of the public to participate vicariously in the missions" [1].

[1] https://spacenews.com/op-ed-lunar-gateway-or-moon-direct/

▲

kube-system 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I cannot wait until we get 4k video of people walking on the surface, kicking up dust.

▲

Gagarin1917 10 hours ago | parent [-]

The existing 16mm film from Apollo is roughly equivalent to 2K, and you can see dust kicked up pretty nicely!

	▲	sgt 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Where can we see that in high quality? Generally if I look at YouTube it's compressed and poor quality.

▲

selfmodruntime 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I agree 100%. Seeing the picture of the backside of the moon with the earth in view really drove home that the moon really is just a large rock.

	▲	bregma 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> backside of the moon I think perhaps you mean the far side of the moon. The "backside" of the moon implies a large graben stretching almost from pole to pole, and I have seen no evidence of such a geological formation in any photos.
	▲	JumpCrisscross 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> the moon really is just a large rock It really is surprising being able to see the Moon isn't spherical. (Are those abberations?) It makes sene, given the moon isn't in hydrostatic equilibrium.

▲

poszlem 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah, I think we got so accustomed to that analog look that seeing them like this feels almost like viewing a World War I photo in full color and 4K.

▲

aksss 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Space monkeys, moon pirates, and a Starbucks in the moon mall.