How come this isn't as good as in the paper?

The image in the recent paper is much better than the one on - how come?

It is likely that this really cool lens was found with the survey, and scientists found it interesting so they used a better telescope to focus specifically on it. For example, when a somewhat nearby galaxy is discovered, maybe in a survey or idk, they then look at it with hubble

Can you post a link to the paper, so that we can have a look at the text?
Maybe they used a larger telescope, as @NateSmartkid said. Or they used a different technique, which is usually described.

1 Like

Here is the paper. There is no mention of using any other telescopes.

1 Like

I think that image was created by the press folks at NOIRLab. You can see that the background is much blacker – they’re stretched it harder and suppressed the sky level. Perhaps also deconvolved, or maybe chose the clearest of the available images.


In the paper from Huang et al. it looks just like the image you posted:
Figure 10, lower right:

“The fourth one (DESI-090.9854-35.9683) is a spectacular system: at least four lensed sources at different redshifts are apparent, including a quad (1, white arrows), a “broken” long arc (2, yellow arrows), one red arc near the core of the group (3, green arrow), and a giant red arc at approximately 14′′ away from the lens center (4, red arrow).”


Image link at NOIRLab website:

I would not call it “better”. For my taste it is pushed a bit too much to the limits.

Aha! The NOIRLab site has finally solved the riddle - it’s SIMULATED! I was wondering how they had managed to get so much extra detail in the central galaxy and in the arcs simply by enhancing the original data - the answer is they made it up! Tut.

…and I think it’s a bit naughty of them not to identify that in a publication. Bad form.


Oh, did not notice this.
In the “Colors & Filters” I did read “Víctor M. Blanco 4-meter Telescope”, so I assumed it was real. I wonder how they managed to get the position of each galaxy and lens arc correct in a simulation. Never came across something like this.