🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <willmore.726856133@kiev.gis.iastate.edu> willmore@iastate.edu (David Willmore) writes:
>From: willmore@iastate.edu (David Willmore)
>Subject: Re: KH-11 pictures -
>Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:28:53 GMT
>lrk@k5qwb.lonestar.org (Mr. Lyn R. Kennedy) writes:
>
>>It seems it would be more feasable to take several pictures by the same 
>>satellite at slightly different locations and combine them 
>>electronically. I'm not sure I understand the limits of this but I've 
>>been led to beleive that it works. A similar method is being used with 
>>radio-telescopes, recording the information simultaneously at several 
>>sites and then combining the data to get better resolution.
>
>There are a few differences.  The wavelength of the radio waves in
>question are much longer than the light waves.  Therefore, the precision
>with which the image receivers must be places is more stringent for the
>optical methods.  It's just not too easy.  I'm not saying that it 
>can't or isn't being done.  It's just difficult to accomplish.
>
>--David Willmore
>willmore@iastate.edu

A few years ago on a television program (NOVA, I think) I saw something
like this. Some people at the Jet Propulion Lab took a couple of digitized
satellite pictures, crunched them in a computer for a while, and ended up
with a 3D model of the subject area (San Francisco, I think) in their
computer.

They could "fly" around the city (between building, etc) and view
objects from different perspectives. I don't think the were increasing
the resolution, but they were extracting the 3rd dimension information
from 2D images.  

Ted Wright (wright@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov)
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.0

mQCNAiqvp90AAAEEAO0VFsrmnZhmALDOZEG6vPlTwB5jqM5swOkhDqJIOHOtyNug
2ZfCpsQUYcrVCKjGs4zaivEoiQxi+538mwNhL9HXQK+I3HR2xESzpJEoLiv62kMI
cwVbEw9QAuxY7Z01KHi+bNYhYQvzBczaVttPJdOTvNpbUCzWIeKXEM95WINbAAUR
tChUZWQgV3JpZ2h0IDx3cmlnaHRAbGltczAxLmxlcmMubmFzYS5nb3Y+
=uu9S
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----