San Francisco Bay Area - high resolution satellite image

From ESA:

Earth observation image of the week: the San Francisco Bay Area in the
US state of California


http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Ima...o_Bay_Area_USA

which also featured on the Earth from Space video programme


http://www.esa.int/spaceinvideos/Vid...o_Bay_Area_USA

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 6/20/2015 4:44 AM, David Taylor wrote:
From ESA:

Earth observation image of the week: the San Francisco Bay Area in the
US state of California


http://www.esa.int/spaceinimages/Ima...o_Bay_Area_USA

which also featured on the Earth from Space video programme


http://www.esa.int/spaceinvideos/Vid...o_Bay_Area_USA



No matter how many times I see images like that, I am fascinated. When I
was in grade school, whenever a plane flew by, we would stop th game an
stare at the plane.


--
PeterN

In article , PeterN
wrote:

http://www.esa.int/spaceinvideos/Vid...ce_San_Francis
co_Bay_Area_USA


No matter how many times I see images like that, I am fascinated. When I
was in grade school, whenever a plane flew by, we would stop th game an
stare at the plane.

that wasn't from a plane.

Interesting, but it doesn't look all that much better
than Google satellite images. I compared the two
next to each other. The Google image was washed
out, but the ESA image looks like it's oversaturated.
I doubt S. California ever gets that green.

In article ,
"Mayayana" wrote:

Interesting, but it doesn't look all that much better
than Google satellite images.

Google Earth doesn't get all pixellated when you zoom in.

I compared the two
next to each other. The Google image was washed
out, but the ESA image looks like it's oversaturated.
I doubt S. California ever gets that green.

It's "N", not "S" California, and yes, it does; have you ever been here
in the spring?

Isaac

On 21/06/2015 00:08, Mayayana wrote:
Interesting, but it doesn't look all that much better
than Google satellite images. I compared the two
next to each other. The Google image was washed
out, but the ESA image looks like it's oversaturated.
I doubt S. California ever gets that green.

Frequently satellite data is processed to bring out certain features.
For example, using a "red" and "near-infra-red" channel, taking the
difference can show the amount of vegetation present (look up NDVI for
more details), and that derived value is often represented as green,
although you may also see it as red. The NDVI allows measurement of the
vegetation.

Not every satellite image is "true-colour".

Satellite data can real-time, whereas with Google the data can be months
or years old.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 21/06/2015 07:21, David Taylor wrote:
On 21/06/2015 00:08, Mayayana wrote:
Interesting, but it doesn't look all that much better
than Google satellite images. I compared the two
next to each other. The Google image was washed
out, but the ESA image looks like it's oversaturated.
I doubt S. California ever gets that green.

Frequently satellite data is processed to bring out certain features.
For example, using a "red" and "near-infra-red" channel, taking the
difference can show the amount of vegetation present (look up NDVI for
more details), and that derived value is often represented as green,
although you may also see it as red. The NDVI allows measurement of the
vegetation.

Not every satellite image is "true-colour".


The colours do looks rather unnatural and uniform, but maybe that's the
way it is.


Satellite data can real-time, whereas with Google the data can be months
or years old.


The Google image is fascinating, and obviously much greater detail.
Thing that I find striking is the small amount of green space within the
built up areas. From a casual look, much less than say Barcelona.

--
Cheers, Rob

| It's "N", not "S" California, and yes, it does; have you ever been here
| in the spring?
|

Looking at a map I see you're right. At least
it's more north than south. I had a distorted
image in my mind of urban CA in the south and
redwood CA in the north, with something-or-
other in between. But no matter... Now that
I know we have a rain forest on the continent
I'm thinking maybe I'll go visit in December, for
the start of mango season.

On 2015-06-21 13:45:48 +0000, "Mayayana" said:

| It's "N", not "S" California, and yes, it does; have you ever been here
| in the spring?
|

Looking at a map I see you're right. At least
it's more north than south. I had a distorted
image in my mind of urban CA in the south and
redwood CA in the north, with something-or-
other in between. But no matter... Now that
I know we have a rain forest on the continent
I'm thinking maybe I'll go visit in December, for
the start of mango season.

We have all sorts of micro climates in California, so much so that in
one very unique micro climate on Hwy 101 just North of Ventura at La
Conchita up to Carpentaria we have successful a banana plantation. The
original banana gardens in La Conchita were badly damaged by landslides
in 1996 and the operation moved further North to Carpentaria where they
have a plantation of 1500 banana trees on 12 acres.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 6/21/2015 2:21 AM, David Taylor wrote:

snip


Satellite data can real-time, whereas with Google the data can be months
or years old.


One of my friends, who is a matrimonial lawyer, represents a husband who
was Googling his house just to seeit. He zoomed in and saw a car in the
driveway at a time when his wife said she wouldn't be home. After a
casual question she stated that she just didn't feel like shopping that
day. She had no believable explanation for that extra car being in the
driveway. I would leave the rest of the saga to your imagination, but in
a moment of weaknesss, she confessed to having a lover.


--
PeterN