🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1994Jan26.224102.18692@clarinet.com> brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:


>If it's false colour, that's true, although JPEGs are also smaller of course,
>though they will distort the false colour a bit.

>While the HST is of course dedicated to cutting edge research, it probably
>would be worthwhile PR for it to take some lovely colour hi-res shots of
>the classic astronomical photos for distribution to the public.  There would
>also probably be some useful research info in them, and I expect it wouldn't
>need exposures nearly as long to do some nice shots of the Messier objects
>and other standards to wow the public.


More than that. If I were in power in the NASA or STSCI I would do the
following:


I would designate a certain amount of telescope time ...  perhaps 0.5 or
1% ... as for "general interest subjects" which would be determined by
three methods: one would be a simple popularity contest among astronomers,
second would be one among the general public, and third would be my own
whim, based on my felling of what's hot at the moment. I would take
appropriate data on these objects and make them instantly public domain
(as actual data, complete will all auxiliary data needed for their
analysis). This would include both images at various wavelengths
and spectra as well, with emphasis on the ultraviolet.


It is inarguable that this would be a benefit to both the general
public and the astronomical community as well. The only people who could
possible "lose" would the the lucky tiny few who would otherwise have
had the only access to this data for a year.


Examples of two things that would have fallen in this category would
have been the great white spot on Saturn and UV spectra of novas
and supernovas.


Doug McDonald