Knowledge

Why do people have trouble accepting the very true fact that “The Blue Marble” photo of Earth is a composite and therefore (just like every other subsequent “picture” of Earth NASA has ever shown us) not a real photo but computer generated?

Okay, guy. This is the actual Blue Marble photo.

It was taken by Apollo 17. It is NOT a composite image. That really is the Earth when viewed from space. The only edit they did was flip the picture vertically. Because to most people of the Northern Hemisphere, the image looked upside down.

Okay? That was it. That was the only edit.

Apparently some of you think that actual photograph is a cgi image.

There it is, the ACTUAL PHOTOGRAPH! It is NOT a CGI image. Computers back then couldn’t create an image close to a photograph taken from a camera that had actual film in it.


I guess you have trouble distinguishing the famous Blue Marble photograph 

(above) and NASA’s composite global mapping image (below), which, perhaps unhelpfully, also goes by the name ‘Blue Marble’. 

The well-known photograph of the Earth is actually just one chosen out of dozens taken by the Apollo 17 crew looking back at the Earth while on their way to the Moon in 1972.

The photos were taken directly using a hand-held 70mm Hasselblad camera.

Here’s a few of them in higher definition. The one that has become famous as the ‘Blue Marble’ shot is the third one of the following selection:

AS17-148-22661

AS17-148–22718

AS17-148–22727

AS17-148–22734

The only ‘post-processing’ done to the famous picture has been to rotate it 180°, simply to show the Earth the familiar way ‘up’. (It was originally photographed upside down, showing the South Pole at the top.)

Computer generated? In 1972, computers could barely generate line drawings. Here’s an example of the best CGI at that time.

As for composite photos, they are a completely normal way to combine lots of photos to give a panoramic or wide-perspective view. For example, here’s an obviously composite photo of a landscape:

Composite photos are routinely used by NASA and other research agencies, and for good reason. Here, for example, is an actual composite photo of Saturn’s moon Titan:

It combines a set of photos taken by the Cassini probe during several close-up flybys of Titan in 2004. Each photo showed a bit of Titan, but none showed all of it. So several photos have been digitally fit together like a jigsaw puzzle to give us an accurate view of the whole of Titan in a single image.

This isn’t fakery or trickery; it’s basic scientific photography.

Related Posts

Why can’t the Earth just all be land?

Earth can be just all land, but we wouldn’t be here. It would be inhospitable to complex life. Surprisingly, though, there is a theory that a planet with…

How long does it take for uranium-235 to be safe?

U235 will never be safe for humans, it is a toxic heavy metal. It can cause damage to the brain, nervous system, kidneys, and other body organs if…

If you stood 100 meters from a nuclear weapon when it detonated, would you live long enough to realise what was happening?

One of the companies I worked for made test instruments that were used during nuclear tests, starting in the 1950s, to calculate device yields. Some of the instruments…

Why did NASA not see Atlas (the comet that is roughly 1/2 the size of the Sun that will come within 70 million miles of the Earth) before?

First, let’s get something out of the way: comet C/2019 Y4 (sometimes called ATLAS after the telescopes that found it) is not “half the size of the sun.” The comet’s…

What happens if you enter the Milky way galactic core?

The galactic core, i.e., the central bulge of the Milky Way, is a region very densely populated by stars. It is a dangerous place. Stars regularly get close…

Why can’t we make small atomic bombs?

I will give you a slightly different answer. “Small” atomic bombs are incredibly more dangerous than big ones. This is a 152-mm Russian nuclear artillery shell. The US…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *