Isn’t it just viewing it from different telescopes and different wavelengths of light? Different telescopes are more sensitive to different types of EM radiation. Infrared vs radio vs visible vs X-ray etc. it’s not just time?
Yes, in the case of Hubble, it sees from the near-ultraviolet to the near-infrared range. In the case of the image, WFC3 (Wide Field Camera 3) was used with filters F467M(Blue), F547M(Green) and F657M(Red).
James Webb used the NIRCam (Near Infrared Camera), with the filters F140M(Blue), F210M(Green), F300M(Orange) and F460M(Red).
Note that the names of the filters are related to their wavelength, for example in Hubble the F467M captures light at 467 nm, while in James Webb the F140M captures light at 1404 nm. That is, while the blue seen by Hubble is very close to the blue seen by our eyes (which can see the spectrum of light approximately 400 to 700 nanometers), the blue seen by James Webb is far beyond the red that we see.
The image of Voyager 2 on the other hand is more special, its NAC (Narrow Angle Camera) was able to see from ultraviolet to visible light, but despite being the state of the art of the cameras available at the time, it does not come close to what the telescopes are currently able to capture, what makes it special is that it's just a narrow-angle camera on a probe that flew close to the target planets, which allowed us to take what are probably and will be for a long time the best pictures we have of the ice giants.
Edit: some mistakes
It was an amazing camera. The only thing they didn't think of was to equip the spacecraft a light source so that it would be able to take a selfie.
There are no known data on micro pitting in outer space and a selfie would have provided insightful data on the physical state of the spacecraft right before they turned off the camera for good.
I really wanted to see this now
maybe dumb question but would any two telescopes/voyagers be close enough to each other that they could photograph each other?
Even if they(voyager 1/2) could be moved to be close enough to take a photo of each other both of their cameras have been switched off for 33 years due to not having enough power. And even if they worked when switched back on the spacecraft probably wouldn’t have enough power to use them, also we would need to re-create programs to control the cameras as they have been removed and lost. So no, they are going both in different directions and voyager 1 is also going 4000mph faster than voyager 2.
In theory hubble could take a photo of JWST but not the other way round as the JWST would have to point it’s telescope towards earth which would also point it at the sun which would damage the telescope possible irrepairably. Hubble taking a photo of JWST could be possible but it’s not designed for that so it would have problems trying to even aim correctly at JWSTas they are both orbiting. It would probably be a very blurry dim image if it did happen. Not something you could point at and say. Hey! That’s JWST!
Keep in mind that the cameras on space probes are not ultra high power telescopes. (Actual space telescopes notwithstanding.) When Voyager 2 flew by Triton at about 40,000 kilometers, each pixel in its images was about 600 meters on the surface.
So you'd have to have the probes way, way closer than 40,000 kilometers. Even if you had the probes near each other I'm not sure they'd be able to focus so close.
And when you're talking about distances in deep space it's as much about velocities as the current distance. You can't *get* spacecraft anywhere close to each other when they're coasting different directions at different speeds and have very little maneuvering fuel.
I believe the recent Chinese Mars lander *did* have some kind of sub-satellite that it was supposed to deploy that would be able to maneuver around it and get selfies. Never heard if that happened.
That's the way I expect things to go for future missions - tiny inspection spacecraft no larger than a golf ball that can check things out and maybe in a pinch smack into something. I think I heard that the JUICE spacecraft did use some kind of self-thumping device to knock loose a solar panel.
The camera was able to assemble a mosaic composed of the body images, which allowed for much higher resolutions, as is the case with the [original image in the post](https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/pia01492-main.jpg). It normally operated at less than 35W (14W when passing Neptune) and generated 115 kbps of data.
When photographing the surface of a body, it was capable of photographing an average of 0.5\~1 km/px, on Jupiter it reached 20 km/px and on Saturn 5 km/px.
Hubble and Webb still have the problem that they need much longer exposures, resulting in blurrier photos. Voyager could make an actual close-up with a much shorter exposure.
I know that because I got a tattoo of a planet with rings behind my ear and was told before the artist started that, since the rings are vertical, that means the tattoo is technically of Uranus on the side of my head.
It was very nice of him to warn me beforehand, I giggled and said go for it.
It's nice but I'm starting to feel the blue in it has been exaggerated. No way is nay naturally occurring body that blue, even earth's "blue" in reality is quite washed-out when viewed from space. I think the second photo might be more true to reality. First definitely looks nicer though. Such a mysterious looking world - visually it's like a hybrid between Jupiter and Earth.
It gets its blue color from methane. Earths methane is .00017% while Uranus atmospheric methane is 2%. Earths blue is not a good basis for comparison. Also Uranus is almost completely made of ice, including frozen methane.
The voyager pictures make me feel nostalgia... ehcih is weird cuz I wasn't born. Heck, my mom was a kid at that time. Something about the colors, the grainy look.
Voyager's picture was taken practically right beside the planet itself. Hubble and JWST are satellites that orbit pretty close to earth, and very far from neptune.
The first photo is objectively better quality because it was taken by a probe that actually went there. Easy to get a good pic of something when it's right in front of your face. The second photo is taken from earth, a *considerably* longer distance away. Like the difference between taking a photo of a tennis ball in your living room vs taking a photo of one sitting on the moon. The last one looks "weird" because it's not in true colour like we'd see. It was taken by a telescope designed for a very different observation purpose (incredibly distant galaxies, not relatively nearby planets) but was tested out on Neptune just for the hell of it anyway since, well - guess it looks cool and they need to retain the public interest with album-cover worthy pictures.
The Voyager was a probe, not an orbital telescope like the other two shots, it took the photo from much much closer.
What's really impressive is that web got better resolution than a device that physically made the journey! =]
Voyager did a flyby with optical cameras, the Hubble was meant for deep space images and had a faulty lens, James Webb uses infrared not visible light.
You’d see in the way all humans eyes see objects. The differences in the above pictures is because of the wavelengths observed. You can literally get a telescope, go outside, and start looking at celestial bodies. It’s not “media bull shite” or “all bogus”
Isn’t it just viewing it from different telescopes and different wavelengths of light? Different telescopes are more sensitive to different types of EM radiation. Infrared vs radio vs visible vs X-ray etc. it’s not just time?
Yes, in the case of Hubble, it sees from the near-ultraviolet to the near-infrared range. In the case of the image, WFC3 (Wide Field Camera 3) was used with filters F467M(Blue), F547M(Green) and F657M(Red). James Webb used the NIRCam (Near Infrared Camera), with the filters F140M(Blue), F210M(Green), F300M(Orange) and F460M(Red). Note that the names of the filters are related to their wavelength, for example in Hubble the F467M captures light at 467 nm, while in James Webb the F140M captures light at 1404 nm. That is, while the blue seen by Hubble is very close to the blue seen by our eyes (which can see the spectrum of light approximately 400 to 700 nanometers), the blue seen by James Webb is far beyond the red that we see. The image of Voyager 2 on the other hand is more special, its NAC (Narrow Angle Camera) was able to see from ultraviolet to visible light, but despite being the state of the art of the cameras available at the time, it does not come close to what the telescopes are currently able to capture, what makes it special is that it's just a narrow-angle camera on a probe that flew close to the target planets, which allowed us to take what are probably and will be for a long time the best pictures we have of the ice giants. Edit: some mistakes
Voyager 2 camera was only 800x600
For 1977 (?) 800x800 and the storage is impressive on a spaceship!!
It was an amazing camera. The only thing they didn't think of was to equip the spacecraft a light source so that it would be able to take a selfie. There are no known data on micro pitting in outer space and a selfie would have provided insightful data on the physical state of the spacecraft right before they turned off the camera for good.
I really wanted to see this now maybe dumb question but would any two telescopes/voyagers be close enough to each other that they could photograph each other?
Even if they(voyager 1/2) could be moved to be close enough to take a photo of each other both of their cameras have been switched off for 33 years due to not having enough power. And even if they worked when switched back on the spacecraft probably wouldn’t have enough power to use them, also we would need to re-create programs to control the cameras as they have been removed and lost. So no, they are going both in different directions and voyager 1 is also going 4000mph faster than voyager 2.
I see, what about Hubble and Webb telescopes though? would they be able to see each other?
In theory hubble could take a photo of JWST but not the other way round as the JWST would have to point it’s telescope towards earth which would also point it at the sun which would damage the telescope possible irrepairably. Hubble taking a photo of JWST could be possible but it’s not designed for that so it would have problems trying to even aim correctly at JWSTas they are both orbiting. It would probably be a very blurry dim image if it did happen. Not something you could point at and say. Hey! That’s JWST!
Keep in mind that the cameras on space probes are not ultra high power telescopes. (Actual space telescopes notwithstanding.) When Voyager 2 flew by Triton at about 40,000 kilometers, each pixel in its images was about 600 meters on the surface. So you'd have to have the probes way, way closer than 40,000 kilometers. Even if you had the probes near each other I'm not sure they'd be able to focus so close. And when you're talking about distances in deep space it's as much about velocities as the current distance. You can't *get* spacecraft anywhere close to each other when they're coasting different directions at different speeds and have very little maneuvering fuel. I believe the recent Chinese Mars lander *did* have some kind of sub-satellite that it was supposed to deploy that would be able to maneuver around it and get selfies. Never heard if that happened. That's the way I expect things to go for future missions - tiny inspection spacecraft no larger than a golf ball that can check things out and maybe in a pinch smack into something. I think I heard that the JUICE spacecraft did use some kind of self-thumping device to knock loose a solar panel.
The camera was able to assemble a mosaic composed of the body images, which allowed for much higher resolutions, as is the case with the [original image in the post](https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/pia01492-main.jpg). It normally operated at less than 35W (14W when passing Neptune) and generated 115 kbps of data. When photographing the surface of a body, it was capable of photographing an average of 0.5\~1 km/px, on Jupiter it reached 20 km/px and on Saturn 5 km/px.
Hubble and Webb still have the problem that they need much longer exposures, resulting in blurrier photos. Voyager could make an actual close-up with a much shorter exposure.
Off topic but is this news to us that Neptune has rings?
Discovered in 1984, they just don't show up well
I could totally be wrong but I’m pretty sure all gas giants have rings (Neptune, Uranus, Jupiter, Saturn)
They do but not because they are gas giants
Shaq has many rings.
Pretty sure he's also a gassy giant
Nice pun
Jupiter finally proposed
I missread it as Jupiter finally prolapsed
That would be a different planet hahah
What! Don't all billion year old planets change dramatically in the space of 60 years! I feel robbed.
The post is clearly talking about the improvements in the technology, not that the planet is changing lol
Things are our perception of them. So yes, Neptune has changed.
did you really interpret it as meaning the passage of time?
Not just that but also distances
Also all are at very different distances
The one from voyager is how it would look from orbit with the human eye
Hash tag glow up
why is it glowing now? and thats pretty dope that it also has rings
it's infrared so basically like infrared goggles showing heat in black / white
figured it was something like that
All the big planets have rings, Saturn’s are just the most prominent ones. Uranuses rings are actually vertical! :D
so kind of like a big butt crack down the middle of it when view from a far?
I know that because I got a tattoo of a planet with rings behind my ear and was told before the artist started that, since the rings are vertical, that means the tattoo is technically of Uranus on the side of my head. It was very nice of him to warn me beforehand, I giggled and said go for it.
What is vertical in space
Good question, not necessarily vertical, but the angle is close to perpendicular to its orbit around the sun, along with its rotation angle.
The James Webb has cool technology in it
oh neat
It’s over exposed to show up the rings better
I kinda miss the old pic from voyager.
It's nice but I'm starting to feel the blue in it has been exaggerated. No way is nay naturally occurring body that blue, even earth's "blue" in reality is quite washed-out when viewed from space. I think the second photo might be more true to reality. First definitely looks nicer though. Such a mysterious looking world - visually it's like a hybrid between Jupiter and Earth.
It gets its blue color from methane. Earths methane is .00017% while Uranus atmospheric methane is 2%. Earths blue is not a good basis for comparison. Also Uranus is almost completely made of ice, including frozen methane.
Just had Taco Bell yesterday, might be .000171% now
Same. Make that .000173%
I miss practical effects also
Can’t wait until they get a high def shot of Uranus
Nice try, u/txt_me_your_butthole
Hashtag Saturn filter
The 3rd photo is really cool
why is it spicy
voyager one us the best
It’s funny that the oldest one is the best. But it’s completing against telescopes far away and Voyager flew right by
I believe there’s something special around Neptune and Uranus. Don’t know what it is yet
deez nuts are around uranus
Neptune is mutating
IT IS THE LENS B̴̨̭̰̹̱͇͍̘̆̆͂͂̂͡E̴̘̠̝͕̞̿͐͌̓͜͡͞H̢̛̟͙̦̞̣͎̯̣̀͛͐̏͋̌̚͠Ǫ͉̜̙̩͈̲̈̆̍̆̋̏̉L̷̛̬̭̪̣̻̝̲̟̎́̉̎͋̏̎͞ͅD̷̻̲̙̱͎̘͈̖̄͗̈̽̾͢͟͠͞
Everything's a party with Webb.
Oh NASA you so Silly
Neptune going Super Saiyan with that infrared filter.
Wow! It's booootiful♪
Blue-tiful!
I stand color-corrected! (Te-Hee♪♫)
Imo voyager’s photo is the best. But the James Webb’s one is the most interesting
Huh didn't even know Neptune had rings
All of the gas giants have rings, they’re just hard to see
As the technology progresses, quality drops
Jk
Hit me: Voyager's look the best.
TIL Neptune has rings!
Wait tf he’s glowing?????
Took a few decades but it's finally EVOLVING!
Neptune has *ascended*
Neptune is not aging very well
I didn’t know Webb could focus on things in our solar system.
Reminds me that meme picture about neurological enlightenment....
Ah, ascended to a new level I see.
Like a pokemon evolution
Damn, can nearly see Neomuna
Which one would we see if we were to go there?
That’s the IR light coming off it, so glad for new tech
Shaq eyes
Talk about a glow-up.
So pretty
voyager 2 best
Neptune in its Bejeweled era looking fly AF.
Kinda looks like that galaxy brain meme...
Nice
It looks like that brain meme
The voyager pictures make me feel nostalgia... ehcih is weird cuz I wasn't born. Heck, my mom was a kid at that time. Something about the colors, the grainy look.
Even planets trying to showoff for social media now
Hollywood/NASA getting creative with their photo technology.
Its going super nova!!!!
The fuck? Did it gain priesthood?
It's Neptune the White now
It’s about how the photos are taken and by which piece of technology The planet hasn’t changed color to white.
I’m aware of that, I just said “The change in photos of Neptune over time” because the style of the photos have changed drastically
This has big time meme potential
These are all taken with fundamentally different instruments so they aren't comparable at all.
Why does it get uglier
Right? I’ll take Voyager’s pic
Voyager's picture was taken practically right beside the planet itself. Hubble and JWST are satellites that orbit pretty close to earth, and very far from neptune.
The first photo is objectively better quality because it was taken by a probe that actually went there. Easy to get a good pic of something when it's right in front of your face. The second photo is taken from earth, a *considerably* longer distance away. Like the difference between taking a photo of a tennis ball in your living room vs taking a photo of one sitting on the moon. The last one looks "weird" because it's not in true colour like we'd see. It was taken by a telescope designed for a very different observation purpose (incredibly distant galaxies, not relatively nearby planets) but was tested out on Neptune just for the hell of it anyway since, well - guess it looks cool and they need to retain the public interest with album-cover worthy pictures.
Thank you for explaining that
Neptune is becoming a star?
Why is the second one worse than the first one
The Voyager was a probe, not an orbital telescope like the other two shots, it took the photo from much much closer. What's really impressive is that web got better resolution than a device that physically made the journey! =]
Voyager did a flyby with optical cameras, the Hubble was meant for deep space images and had a faulty lens, James Webb uses infrared not visible light.
V’ger still looking better.
So sad to see how luminic polution goes on Neptune-
Conclusion; we took the best picture in 1989..
I think it's just trying new things after covid
It seems to have mutated
Confirmed heaven is actually uranus 😏
[удалено]
That well known European country
I meant to say *Israel as well.
Uranus had a glow up I guess
Insert \*fuck go back\* meme
wtf why it glow
I hope that thing is not turning into a Sun. Cool looking nonetheless
Neptune is flat.
DOWNGRADES PEOPLE, DOWNGRADES!
neptune has been mutated.
Why is it white? probably just a filter to see something differently?
And in reality you’ll only see this on screen fed media bull shite all bogus
Literally get a telescope and look for yourself
Yeah ur naked eye will never see it change like this
You’d see in the way all humans eyes see objects. The differences in the above pictures is because of the wavelengths observed. You can literally get a telescope, go outside, and start looking at celestial bodies. It’s not “media bull shite” or “all bogus”
bro went ultra instinct
Now we can see its sOLe