So, for example, a typical image suitable for a fairly realistic magazine color illustration of a portrait, still life or landscape might have 3 bands (RGB) of 512 x 512 byte pixels: a total of 3 x 512 x 512 x 8 = 6,291,456 bits.

I’m not being nit-picky here, I’m just curious to see how much information can be extracted from one image, its intensity, color, and spatial resolution–how faithful its color, how much magnification it can stand, and the full dynamic range of its light levels. The example I gave above would be fine for a color snapshot of a pretty girl or a sailboat, but would stand up to only limited enhancement, or be of limited use for scientific analysis.

It appears the nomenclature conventions have changed since I worked in the field.

I haven’t been interested in upgrading to a 4K display because of the lack of content. Now, anticipating being able to look down into the clouds of Jupiter at extremely high resolutions…now I just may have a reason.

I think my fascination is because I’ve seen it in my mind’s eye so many times, reading so many science fiction stories that take place at Jupiter. In real life we’ve focused on the moons but neglected study of Jupiter itself; but in sci-fi, authors keep coming back to imagine looking into the clouds, and descending into the clouds, and trying to describe in words an environment of world-sized clouds and canyons and eddies, and winds of many thousands of miles an hour.

And hydrogen-breathing continent-sized “whales” and other fancies, but that would be too much to ask. I’d be happy with clouds.

Pretty soon, we’ll get to take our own close up look. For real.

This isn’t the first time a camera was added as an afterthought to a robot probe. Scientists get a funny kind of tunnel vision, they have the imaginations to see an entire world through the one instrument they’ve built and operated. That keyhole view is enough for a scientist, but the rest of us need to see the whole wondrous world with our own eyes.

Juno has the potential to be another great mission of space exploration. NASA does indeed rock!

I don’t mean to either exagerrate or belittle this public purpose, or to criticize mission planners for thinking this way. I understand enough of the physics involved to realize that imagery, regardless of how spectacular, can only give a limited idea of the physical processes going on below the cloud tops. But I also realize we apes are primarily visual creatures, and a picture can convey so much information, and beyond that, understanding, of what is going on. This is especially the case with modern spacecraft imagery, which exploits wavelengths of light and post-processing techniques which can reveal so much not noticeable to the unaided eye. We may even see something totally unexpected, maybe something wonderful.

My interest in astronomy has taught me the value of spectroscopy, photometry, bolometric analysis and x-ray, radio, gamma-ray, IR and UV studies. But for sheer drama and beauty, and eventually, scientific insight, CCD detectors and the photographic emulsion still are hard to beat. Jupiter has no geomorphology like Pluto or Ceres, but even the shifting patterns of the cloud tops have something to teach us. I can’t wait.

I doubt it’s been released yet, but watch for it. Impressive.

http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/89211042

I think the live stream of the Orbital insertion will be here:
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/5808990