The pictures I posted were meant as a general interpretaton of colour, or marked lack of it, as perceived by the human eye. They are I think generally realistic, but were made from uncalibrated and compressed pictures and compressed again to post; they should not be treated as rigourous scientific data.
Michael Kilderry,
It is telling that the colours that you "brung out" (I love you for that phrase
) are primary or secondary colours, green and magenta and blue, and that they mostly occur near the limb or terminater. If I saw these while putting the original RGB channels together I would have been sure that either the red, green or blue channel was over exposed or taken at a time when Cassinis velocity altered the view of the moon. What you appear to have done is highly exaggerate flaws in my pictures, not resolve real colour information from them. You are just having a bit of fun with it, like me, or I hope you are, but I don't think Mimas will have anything green about the place, sorry.
Evil Doctor
Just to let you know I used the same raw images of Rhea as you, I did nothing to them but convert them to lossless *.pic, so that I could use them with Iris. Guess I should get used to using histograms, your picture does look more natural. I do see a progression to a browny grey when using gamma correction for both images, but it might not mean much. As a point of interest I ran eyedropper over the 3 original raw images and it might be the case that the empty black space in the red one (N00026545) is less over exposed than the green or blue, by one or two points of RGB. Could it be made redder? Something to look into perhaps, I'm a bit tired though...
