IMINT

>>34311747
2 secret 4 u

Facial recognition would require an unfeasibly large aperture on the satellite.

>>34311747
Satellite? No. But shit like Gorgon Stare on aircraft is fucking insane.

>>34311747
I've always figured that since the publicly available things like the high resolution Google map tiles are pretty good, the government must keep the really cool tier to itself.

>>34311747
Get a clearance and find out.

>>34311747
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGxNyaXfJsA

This was only 4 years ago, so who knows what they have now.

File: Satellite_Image_Auckland_New_Zealand_Port.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>34311747
Pic related is the highest resolution available on commercial satellites (30cm).

>>34313013
>high resolution Google map tiles are pretty good
The high resolution stuff on Google Maps/Earth is done by airplane.

File: sat res.jpg (1017KB, 3172x1556px) Image search: [Google]

1017KB, 3172x1556px

>>34314130
Thats a commercial saterlite, Govt satelites are presumned to have to have higher resolution capabilities, but the tech is highly classified, since it would even the playing field
>After all, the resolution that DigitalGlobe uses is set at 30 centimeters by law, not by technology. In 2014, the federal government cleared DigitalGlobe to sell photos at a higher resolution than the 50 centimeters-per-pixel it had previously been limited to. Its existing satellites — including WorldView-4, which was launched in November, and WorldView-3, launched shortly after the government cleared the new resolution — collect 30-centimeter images that it then sells to the public.

What is the best service to find high-res images of areas?

>>34314255

Depends on location and amount you are willing to pay, could you be more specific as to the desired image subject?

>One estimate of the resolution of the successor to the KH-11 puts the possible resolution in the range of 10 centimeters-per-pixel. In our phone conversation, Bianchetti described having read about a satellite capable of achieving a 7 centimeter-per-pixel resolution.

Scientifically, the govt has very good satellites

>>34314265
I mean, situation A: A piece of urban land with several buildings
Situation B: A military base

>>34314265
How much money are we talking? How expensive can these things get?

>>34314255


http://vterrain.org/Imagery/commercial.html

Might be of interest to you, but google maps images are probably the best you can get for free.

>>34314299
>>34314310

Thousands of dollars per image (flight time/ positioning/ man hours/ development are all costs) and in some cases you can get flagged and/or arrested for gathering certain information about classified locations

>>34314255
nasa world wind has high res plane shots for many us cities but they are pretty old

>>34314310

Other options are looking for open source and specific non governmental intelligence agencies that can provide high resolution images of locations, it might not be to your exact specifications, but they pay big money to get the lates information since that is the business they are in, check out

http://www.janes.com/

(also great for referencing aircraft and vessel intel)

http://www.janes.com/magazines/ihs-janes-defence-weekly

>>34314240

The big advancement in spy satellites was off angle viewing.

Rather than looking straight down, which make it easy for your adversaries to know why you are overhead, you have the ability to look at things that are hundreds of miles away. This not only makes it harder for you opponents to cover thins up when you sat is passing over, but also lets you "look" inside a hanger for example.

>>34314356

>Aerial photography prices vary widely depending on the method used to capture images, the geographical location, and the scope of work required. However, as a general benchmark, helicopter footage starts at about $350 (approximately the same as light airplanes) and drone work at $120. Drone aerial photography prices are lower simply because getting the rig up in the air is much easier than a helicopter or plane. Some outfits also offer “elevated” footage that is not technically aerial but may be more affordable.

more free stuff
>https://lta.cr.usgs.gov/NAPP

You could probably also join an organization like infragard (FBI/civilian program to share intel) https://www.infragard.org/ and get free stuff (its all UNLCASS/FOUO)

>>34311861
Well, sattelites employed by the nro is evidentally 1 or 2 generations ahead of the hubble telescope (google nasa nro hubble), which can take images of galaxies 13.2 billion light years away. Of course, they're probably not completely comparable, but still.

>>34311747

>movies view them as so clear that you can get a facial PID on someone walking on the street.

There are private sector technologies that are capable of that to an extent. Several companies have started using non-opt out meh nets to coroberate identification obased on data retrieved by cell phones and other optical devices (phone cameras, wifi secuirity cameras etc.)

Even police body cameras build and compile data records and use advanced facial recognition.

It has been said that facial recognition can be obtained with 10% visible face.

Even when no positive facial ID is available, gait and movement detection and analysis can identify individuals with a high level of accuracy.

Many major cities use privatized software and hardware providers for security. The moral of the story is if you can pay enough money, you can get all the information the government has. The data from "police" cameras does not even belong to LE, it belongs to the out sourced data storage and gathering companies who manage software for law enforcement and their rented hardware.

Metadata is a dangerous weapon, and the ones who control it are only in it for the money