Slashdot Mirror
Fermilab Builds 500-Megapixel Camera
heyitsme writes "Fermilab, a U.S. Department of Energy research lab, is part of a collaboration on an experiment to measure the properties of dark energy. The Dark Energy Survey would measure the history of the expansion rate of the universe more precisely than ever before, using the largest camera ever built with Charge Coupled Devices (CCD). The 500 megapixel Dark Energy Camera (DECam) would be placed on an existing 4-meter telescope located in north-central Chile at the National Optical Astronomy Observatory's Cerro Tololo Inter-American Observatory. The DECam together with the CTIO 4-meter telescope will allow for a survey of 15 percent of the sky to light levels faint enough to measure the colors of galaxies at redshift one."
I would hate to see how much space one frame from this thing takes up...
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
That they were able to save money by using an existing telescope.
Because the compact flash cards for this thing cannot be cheap.
cool but does it fit in my pocket?
im going to japan soon and i need a good camera......
I dont EVER want to be photographed in that much detail !!
in Photoshop, it be a sight to behold. Or even better, embed one of these pics in a pdf file and EMAIL it to a friend. Ah yes good times for admins, systems, and users everywhere to enjoy!
"There is no real right or wrong, just what the majority accepts at the time."
(Not an expert, they're all fast asleep right now.)
One of the things Fermilab is trying to do is get a measurement of the so called weak lensing effect. Matter distorts spacetime, and light is thus bent as it passes nearby a big cluster. This is gravitational lensing.
Famously, it is seen as "strong" lensing -- when the source is very close on the sky to the cluster, and the light gets bent enough that there are multiple images. Nobody really believed it could happen, but then in the last decade or so it's become an accepted and popular thing to play with and observe.
Weak lensing is when there are no multiple images, and instead only a slight distortion. Much harder to see and measure -- you basically look for a whole bunch of galaxies that are slightly distorted.
That means you need a very wide field of view -- to get enough galaxies quickly enough -- but also a very good resolution -- to be able to measure the slight distortions. Hence the need for such an insane[ly cool] device.
Why go through all this trouble? Well, weak lensing is one of the view ways to measure all the matter in the universe on very large scales. Because nearly all the matter is supposed to be invisible, in the past people have used various "tracers" that we can see. But there's a huge amount of debate as to how good the various tracers are, and, of course, you need a direct measurement to be sure you're not off in la-la land.
Weak lensing measures it all because all matter, regardless of how bright it is, bends spacetime in the same fashion. So, if you can get a good weak lensing measurement, you can theoretically create an unbiased map of the matter distribution. No need to cross your fingers and hope that some tracer is behaving properly.
It all fits into dark energy because dark energy is supposed to alter the extent to which matter can cluster (roughly speaking, dark energy behaves like antigravity, and pushes things apart, stopping them from falling together.)
Of course, weak lensing is just one of the things this guy is meant to do -- there are lots of other neat things that hopefully someone more awake than I can describe.
Protect your liberties. Donate to the ACLU
Anyway, with 500MP you're going to be severely limited by the resolving power of the lens. It's quite difficult to get even 100 line pairs per mm with the best 35mm photographic lenses (lenses for larger formats tend to be much worse because it's harder to maintain accuracy over a large glass area, plus it's not as necessary with lower enlargement factors). A 500MP sensor needs a pretty exceptional telescope in front of it.
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
Finally something that has higher system requirements than Longhorn!!!
Even at this level of digital imaging, it has a weak, useless flash, intolerable low light noise, and sucks batteries in no time. Actually, I'm really looking forward to seeing the images this thing captures
Yeah, I guess I'm funny like that.
Time to dig up the old Digital icon?
... if the camera is 500MP then yes the digital zoom would in fact be useful, being that the resolution is so massive you can keep zooming in and zooming in for a very long time before there's any noticable degradation in image quality (assuming a perfect lense etc here which is not possible). what i'm pretty sure he meant was, say take a photo from 200m above a busy city st, and u could sit there for hours and hours just zooming in on that photo looking at cracks in the sidewalk or the hairs on peoples heads.
The article mentions "The five-year DES hopes to generate about 100 terabytes of data" that will be released to the public at regular intervals....
This kit is probably one example of why the world needs more 92 Tbs routers; sharing the data generated by this baby will probably be a task not unlike that faced by the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. You're going to have to have a really nice architecture and set of protocols to be able to efficiently pass around these images - possibly this is where Grid Technology comes in to play....
Of course, then you'll need something to actually process the images on! I guess Intel and AMD still have a rosy future ahead of them...
Is there Linux support for it?
Hmm.. Attach a pair of 5$ binoculars to your 106$ scanner and you have your personal deep-space telescope!
Now attach that to a $1 paper airplane and you have DIY Hubble! yay!
total cost: 106$
Makes you wonder how NASA managed to spend
so much on Hubble!
Keep in mind, however, that this is going to be used with a reflector telescope. And that this telescope has a 4-meter aperture. The primary mirror in a telescope of this size costs millions of dollars, and is machined to an incredibly precise level of accuracy. The question is, when do we get parabolic reflector handheld digicams?
[Person A]I told you before, megapixels don't matter... [Person B]But it's 500 Megapixels... [Person A]500 megapixels, 5 megapixels... it doesn't matter. Everyone knows that. It's common knowledge that megapixels is just a marketing trick. [Person B]But... [Person A]Look I read slashdot and everyone says the same. [Person B]ok...
CMOS is cheaper and can transfer the image faster off of the chip, but CCDs offer lower dark noise and lower reading noise, which means that your pictures are clearer and more scientifically usuable. CCDs are also INCREDIBLY more sensitive than CMOS, with the newer chips able to get upwards of 85% efficiency.
-Bill
-Bill
Scientist: Shouldn't the telescope be pointing into
deep space rather than at that satellite with the
big mirror on it?
NRO guy: Nah, this is good.
Not really. If you're looking for a decent A4 print, you need at least 5MP. A raw image from this beast contains 100 of those images, so you could use "digital zoom" (actually, just cropping) to concentrate on specific parts of the image at perfectly acceptable resolution.
You're right about the general uselessness of digital zoom on low-end digicams, but this is a different beast.
Ydco co
How can they tell a picture of dark energy apart from a picture where they just forgot to take the lens cap off?
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
Didn't take long for somebody to come up with a use for that Cisco router...
I heard that the 502 mega-pixel camera is coming out in six months.
There seems to be a lot of interest all of a sudden on slashdot on super high res images (yesterday there was an article on a large film camera which was by no means revolutionary or record setting). It's really not that cutting edge. If you go to www.betterlight.com, they're releasing a 4x5 back capable of 10200x13800 pixels soon, and already have one available that's about 100 Mpixel. Granted, these are slow, but they've been available for a long time and are used daily by product photographers. I shoot 4x5 myself on film and make 550 MB scans. It's relatively cheap and very high res.
So, if this thing can see 15% of the sky at a shot, can it be used to look for incoming 'Global Killers?'
- Camera Vans to Photograph 50 Million Buildings
- When 8 Megapixels Just Isn't Enough
- Missing Matter... Still Missing
Hmmm...so... what kind of flash do I need?
It's supposed to be completely automatic, but actually you have to press this button.
That actually would not cost to much more to store when compared to the cost of getting your film done at a 1 hour photo. /by 1.7gig and you've got 20.5 pictures @ 49 cents a pic.Now to develope a single 25 picture roll of kodak APS film is 10.00 (9.99 actually). so thats 40 cents a print.
Considering I payed 10 bucks for a 50 pack of cd's which is about normal. So * that by 700 meg and
Yes I know it would be hard to break the image between three disks but im just saying cost wise its not much at all.
i did some work at Brookhaven National Lab a while back; i hooked up with a cute chick who was into physics and got to slum around the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider quite a bit (mostly the STAR detector, for those who care). i almost choked when i saw a win2k workstation humming away, but that was just the interface computer (there tend to be a lot of interns and such working, so a windows frontend is handy, cuts back the learning curve quite a bit). the rest of the lot was a hodgepodge of unix kit; the really really mission-critical hardware (the stuff that actually ran the collider) was running Solaris, at least as near as i could tell, along with quite a few linux and sgi boxes around for data processing and visualization (if you want pretty posters, get the gold ion collisions from the website).
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
I was expecting red shift .5 capabilities...
If you're 6 feet tall and we use the long dimension of the image (240k pixels), that's 7.62 microns per pixel. A typical cell is 10 microns, so we've got a pretty detailed picture of you.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
>youu can keep zooming in and zooming in for a very long time before there's any noticable degradation
I think a better way to put it would be that here is that if you want a smaller image( less information) you can selectively crop it out. If you're targeting 1-2 megapixels final size, you could be quite selective in finding the perfect picture in a 500 megapixel image.
Digital "zoom" is badly named because it's not really a zoom, it's a crop, followed by a resample. In practice most people find that they want to take full resolution pictures all the time, and save the cropping for later, on their PC - where they can have tighter control. I imagine that the buyers of this device would have a huge storage device to attach to it, and still do the same thing.