Slashdot Log In
Google's GeoEye-1 Takes Its First Pictures
Posted by
timothy
on Thu Oct 09, 2008 03:18 PM
from the seattle's-beauty-would-damage-the-sensors dept.
from the seattle's-beauty-would-damage-the-sensors dept.
Kev92486 writes "I was scanning through my RSS feeds today and happened upon an article about Google's GeoEye-1 imaging satellite which launched on Sept 6. Intrigued as to what the quality of the image was like, I decided to check it out only to find that the first picture was actually of my college campus, Kutztown University (Pennsylvania).
I had to make sure I was reading the article correctly as Kutztown is not a very large or well known campus. I'm not sure as to why they chose Kutztown for their first pictures. I would be interested if anybody could provide some sort of insight as to what process was used to select the first test location. Was the satellite simply in a convenient orbit to snap pictures of Kutztown?" Update: 10/09 20:56 GMT by T : HotHardware has its own article up on GeoEye-1, if you'd like your words and pictures in the same place.
I had to make sure I was reading the article correctly as Kutztown is not a very large or well known campus. I'm not sure as to why they chose Kutztown for their first pictures. I would be interested if anybody could provide some sort of insight as to what process was used to select the first test location. Was the satellite simply in a convenient orbit to snap pictures of Kutztown?" Update: 10/09 20:56 GMT by T : HotHardware has its own article up on GeoEye-1, if you'd like your words and pictures in the same place.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
I'll Tell You Why (Score:5, Funny)
I had to make sure I was reading the article correctly as Kutztown is not a very large or well known campus. I'm not sure as to why they chose Kutztown for their first pictures. I would be interested if anybody could provide some sort of insight as to what process was used to select the first test location. Was the satellite simply in a convenient orbit to snap pictures of Kutztown?
Maybe you could explain this close up image [pcworld.com] of your campus? (It's from the lower right of the article's image)
Don't be coy, we all saw the lead up to this in the papers earlier this year [imageshack.us]. Kutztown's had this coming--it was one thing to invite Putin to talk but when he left those trailers, that was too far.
On a serious note, I'm certain they picked Kutztown based on the following:
Let P denote the number of lawyers a university has on reserve.
Let Q denote the number of lawyers Google has on reserve.
Let R denote said university's reserve resources for emergencies.
Let L be a function such that L(x) = the number of lawyers one can immediately hire with x dollars.
Is P + L(R) Q? Then I think we have a candidate! I found it on Google Scholar.
Re:I'll Tell You Why (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe you could explain this close up image [pcworld.com] of your campus? (It's from the lower right of the article's image)
For anybody interested in the close up image, wondering where it *actually* is (because it ain't in the article's image), take a gander here:
Google Maps (pops) [google.com]
The plane's actually sitting in a carpark in the western suburbs of Paris, France.
Parent
That's no moon... (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe you could explain this close up image of your campus? (It's from the lower right of the article's image)
That's just a Mirage.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I wonder how many readers here actually get the joke [wikipedia.org]? The thing is, it looks more like an F-102 Delta Dart/Dagger [strategic-...ommand.com] to me.
I thought that pic was one of the tanks! (Score:3, Informative)
I had the feeling someone was watching me today... (Score:3, Funny)
..
Kutztown? (Score:5, Funny)
Gesundheit!
mirror (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks, that image is amazing.
I wouldn't have guessed it was from a satellite. With that kind of resolution, I'd have expected it to be shot from an aircraft.
-jcr
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't rhyme well enough.
Nice Football Field (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Nice Football Field (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Tennis courts (Score:5, Funny)
It bothers me that the tennis courts are not equally spaced. Can they fix that and take another picture?
Here's why... (Score:5, Funny)
I think they were aiming for the First United Church of Kutztown, but the coordinates were off. Rumor has it the abbreviation is written on the roof.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think they were aiming for the First United Church of Kutztown, but the coordinates were off. Rumor has it the abbreviation is written on the roof.
Abbreviation? So Fstuntdchurkutz? Confusing but thank god they didn't put their acronym on the roof though!
Friends University... (Score:5, Funny)
My father-in-law got his undergrad education at Friends University of Central Kansas. No joke. I'd even just settle for a sweatshirt with the big "F.U." in the middle.
(It's even funnier in some respects when you know that "Friends" here refers to the Quakers. :)
Cheers,
Parent
Waiting for Green Bay (Score:3, Insightful)
Even more curious to me is why Google Earth still has such a low-res image of Green Bay, WI (Packers!!), but I can see Cochranton, PA (population: a few dozen or so) clear as crystal. Go figure.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Even more curious to me is why Google Earth still has such a low-res image of Green Bay, WI (Packers!!), but I can see Cochranton, PA (population: a few dozen or so) clear as crystal. Go figure.
Note: Resolution is directly proportionate to intelligence per capita. Having worked "Packers!" into every single one of your discussions your entire life has left you devoid of intelligence and full of beer & cheese, hasn't it? However I'm sure you've managed to mate with another manatee and spread your seed to annoy the hell out of other states with your dumbass unfounded allegiance to one of football's most mediocre teams.
How's Brett?
Re:Waiting for Green Bay (Score:5, Informative)
Could be any number of things. My farm in rural Iowa is at such a low resolution that it's difficult to make out large buildings. (And it's obviously reconstructed form false color images. Probably less than 30m resolution.
However a mile to the west there's a huge strip of very high resolution images. ~0.5m resolution. Why? It just so happens that there is a large wind farm going up in that strip of land. It seems that the wind farm company paid for a high resolution survey of the area and that just got added to the data pile. Until someone wants to see what yet another soybean farm looks like, I'm SOL. (Which is too bad because I'd really like to see how the crops are doing from a few thousand miles away.)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Mirror (Score:2)
don't ask slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
go outside, write your question and your email address on a poster, and point it skyward
then go inside and wait for a reply in your inbox
if you don't like google's answer, go outside, and stick your middle finger up to the sky
not impressed with orbit (Score:5, Informative)
Re:not impressed with orbit (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fairly Random (Score:5, Interesting)
The actual image collected was a 16 km wide swath cut through PA and part of New York. The swath was chosen based on timing and that it would be fairly close to nadir. As for why Kutztown in particular, I'll ask around, but I think it was basically just something interesting to look at(read:not trees). The calibration and focus were probably pretty good at that point in the image too. Keep in mind this is literally the very first image from the satellite, using preliminary calibration and focus, with the color bands aligned by hand. The imagery from this satellite is going to be exceptional once everything is said and done.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The swath was chosen based on timing and that it would be fairly close to nadir.
I think you mean perigee [wikipedia.org] not nadir [wikipedia.org].
-jcr
Re:Fairly Random (Score:5, Informative)
The swath was chosen based on timing and that it would be fairly close to nadir.
I think you mean perigee [wikipedia.org] not nadir [wikipedia.org].
-jcr
Nope I meant nadir
The nadir angle is basically how far to the side the satellite is pointing from its ground track. The farther off nadir the more you're looking at the sides of buildings and trees vs. the top. You're generally off a bit, but anything above 30 starts to get useless for most things.
Parent
More info on the sat (Score:4, Interesting)
Since there's nothing interesting in TFA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoEye_1#GeoEye-1 [wikipedia.org]
*end oblig wikipedia karma-whoring*
Re: (Score:2)
Man if they can do 41cm for $200M, imagine what the expensive ones can do.
Playing catch up... (Score:3, Interesting)
This was the one feature that maps.live.com had over google maps - they had this clarity before Google did, and they also offer the birds eye view which gives you an angled perspective rather than straight down.
I'm glad Google now offers something similar as I like their service much better. In all fairness however, it should be acknowledged that Google was beat to the punch by Microsoft on this.
Go Bills! (Score:2)
Lot of Andre Reed fans out there at Google, I guess.
0.41 m B&W vs 1.65 m colour resolution? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What a letdown (Score:5, Informative)
Yes, but the high resolution imagery currently on Google maps typically comes from areal photos, not from satellite imagery. The news here is that the images were taken from a satellite in orbit, not from a plane.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
aerial
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What a letdown (Score:5, Informative)
Well, it's not really news. If you understand the different data sources, it should come as no surprise that these images are not as good as the high-resolution aerial photos and as good as good satellite photos (think of the before/after tsunami photos)
Good aerial photos have a pixel resolution of 6 inches. Decent ones are 12 inches. GeoEye-1's resolution is 50 cm, or about 19 inches. 19 inches is good for working with large objects, but not useful for fine-grained measurements. (it will be fine for 99.9% of the apps Googlers develop)
For a good example of 6 and 12 inch data, look at the state of Indiana (in the US) in Google Earth. In 2005/6, Indiana re-imaged the entire state with aerial photos. The whole state is at least 12 inches and all metro areas are 6 inches.
I'll be really excited when we can get continually updated 6 inch data... My only concern is that with Google's dominance, we'll be stalled at 19 inches for a long time and people will start to think that's the best we can do.
-Chris
Parent
Re:What a letdown (Score:5, Informative)
Why would Google's dominance have anything to do with the 50cm limit? That's a government restriction on what's available for civilian use. The wired article says that it actually is capable of ~40cm but NGA degrades the resolution before releasing it to Google or anyone else. I know of another spacecraft that had to be placed in a higher orbit in order to keep the resolution below the limits.
Since the US commercial space industry is effectively isolated by ITAR restrictions, but is still dominant overall for now, a US restriction basically leads to a world-wide restriction for everyone but other governments. A loosening of US regulation is the only real way to improve commercial space imagery in the short term, although if ITAR isn't loosened soon, the world's going to catch up and surpass the US anyway. But of course, saying you want to stop fighting international arms trade is about as easy as saying you want to make life easier for pedophiles or terrorists, and I can't see it passing anytime soon.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Bottom line: there are good practical reasons why you won't see 6-inch imagery of the whole planet any time soon.
Re:What a letdown (Score:5, Interesting)
Good aerial photos have a pixel resolution of 6 inches.
Do you mean 6 inches per pixel? This [192.com] might impress you. I think it's 4cm per pixel but only available over central London for the time being.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For a good example of 6 and 12 inch data, look at the state of Indiana (in the US) in Google Earth. In 2005/6, Indiana re-imaged the entire state with aerial photos. The whole state is at least 12 inches and all metro areas are 6 inches.
Also see the entire country of Denmark. And it has better color correction than the state of Indiana. For example, Tivoli Gardens [google.com] and these strange neighborhoods [google.com].
Re: (Score:2)
True. A lot of people miss that - the really good resolution pictures on G are typically taken from aeroplanes or (more rarely) helicopters. Who knows what military/intel sats can do - for sure they'll never share. One thing they have in common with commercial sats tho' is problems with clouds and other stuff (moving fast high in sky, extreme angles of incidence, blah blah. The bs about being able to read your newpaper is just that...bs).
Still, pretty damn good picture.
As to why this place? Probably the
Re:What a letdown (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
As someone with a wiener big enough to be seen from space I am concerned by this.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
...because they can.
and now you have complained on a public website they will watch you good.. mwuahahahah.
Have you looked at the car parked across the street, watching?
Sleep tight.
OH NOES (Score:2)
*Waits for Google employees to T.P. his house and egg his car*
Re: (Score:2)
Smile!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)