Tropical Cyclone Idai: Before, During and After

As of the time of this writing, there is currently a humanitarian crisis in Mozambique caused by what was Tropical Cyclone Idai. Here’s the situation as of 25 March 2019.

Wikipedia actually has a pretty detailed history of Idai. Long story short, one of the worst (“worst” meaning large negative impact on humans) tropical cyclones in recorded history for the Southern Hemisphere formed just off the coast of Mozambique on 4 March 2019. It quickly headed inland as a tropical storm, where it dropped heavy rains on northern Mozambique and Malawi. Then, it turned back into the Mozambique Channel, headed for Madagascar, stopped, turned around, rapidly intensified, and then hit Mozambique a second time as a Category 2 cyclone. After making it on land a second time, it stalled out and dissipated, dropping more heavy rain in the process on central Mozambique and eastern Zimbabwe. Here is a long loop from Meteosat-8 showing much of the life cycle of Cyclone Idai as it appeared in the longwave infrared (IR).

Here’s a visible (True Color) loop from VIIRS that covers most of the month of March:

Animation of VIIRS True Color images from both S-NPP and NOAA-20 (1-25 March 2019)

Animation of VIIRS True Color images from both S-NPP and NOAA-20 (1-25 March 2019)

This loop has been reduced in resolution to half of its original size to save on file size. Even with only 2-3 images per day (since we combined both S-NPP and NOAA-20 images), you can still clearly see the cyclone over Mozambique early in the loop head out to sea and then turn around and hit Mozambique again, where it dumped heavy rain for several days.

But, I want to draw your attention to several of the images in that loop: the beginning, the middle, and the end. On 1 March 2019, NOAA-20 got a pretty clear view of central Mozambique:

NOAA-20 VIIRS True Color composite image (11:32 UTC, 1 March 2019)

NOAA-20 VIIRS True Color composite image (11:32 UTC, 1 March 2019)

We’ll call this the “Before” image – and this one is full resolution (750 m). (NOTE: You have to click on it show it at full resolution.) We can also look at the Natural Color RGB (also known as the Day Land Cloud RGB and about a dozen other names), which we can make with the high resolution imagery bands I-1, I-2 and I-3:

NOAA-20 VIIRS Natural Color RGB composite image (11:32 UTC, 1 March 2019)

NOAA-20 VIIRS Natural Color RGB composite image (11:32 UTC, 1 March 2019)

This is also at full resolution (375 m). (Again, only if you click on it.)

The worst of the flooding occurred with Idai’s second landfall on 14 March 2019, and both VIIRS got great views of Idai prior to landfall:

NOAA-20 Natural Color RGB composite image (10:47 UTC, 14 March 2019)

NOAA-20 Natural Color RGB composite image (10:47 UTC, 14 March 2019)

S-NPP Natural Color RGB composite image (11:38 UTC, 14 March 2019)

S-NPP Natural Color RGB composite image (11:38 UTC, 14 March 2019)

These images were taken ~50 min. apart. And, if you couldn’t already tell, they’re the high resolution Natural Color images. This is for two reasons: 1) who doesn’t want to see tropical cyclones at the highest resolution possible? and 2) the Natural Color RGB brings out details in the cloud structure you can’t see in True Color. As we’ve discussed before, Natural Color highlights ice clouds in a cyan color, while liquid clouds are nearly white. But, if you look closely in the above images, you will see lighter and darker cyan regions in the clouds above (or at the top of) the eyewall. This is due to differences in particle size. Larger ice particles appear more cyan, while smaller ice particles appear more white. (Of course, there is also some shadowing going on, which accounts for the darkest regions.)

Another thing to note is the first image comes from NOAA-20, which was to the east of Idai. This provides a great view of the sloped structure of the west side of the eyewall. (And, not much information on the east side of the eyewall.) The second image comes from Suomi-NPP, which was to the west of Idai, looking at the east side of the eyewall. The two satellites in tandem provide an almost 3D view of the clouds in the eyewall (separated by 50 minutes, of course).

Also, see that peninsula that is just to the west of the eyewall in the last two images? (Hint: you won’t see it unless you bring up the full resolution versions.) That’s where the city of Beira is (or was). Beira was home to half a million people, and was one of the major ports in Mozambique. It took a direct hit from the eyewall of Idai, which destroyed approximately 90% of the buildings there. Beira was also ground zero for the resulting flooding, and the pictures coming out are not pretty.

This is a good segue to talk about the images from the end of the loop. NOAA-20 captured a relatively cloud-free view of Mozambique on 25 March 2019:

NOAA-20 VIIRS True Color composite image (10:42 UTC, 25 March 2019)

NOAA-20 VIIRS True Color composite image (10:42 UTC, 25 March 2019)

NOAA-20 VIIRS Natural Color RGB composite image (10:47 UTC, 25 March 2019)

NOAA-20 VIIRS Natural Color RGB composite image (10:47 UTC, 25 March 2019)

These images were collected 10 days after landfall, and the flooding is still evident. Don’t believe me? Compare these “After” images with the “Before” images shown earlier (zoomed in on Beira):

Animation comparing NOAA-20 True Color RGB composite images from 1 March 2019 and 25 March 2019

Animation comparing NOAA-20 True Color RGB composite images from 1 March 2019 and 25 March 2019

Notice the fertile, green agricultural land surrounding Beira in the “before” image that is covered by brown floodwater in the “after” image. Just like what we saw in the pictures from Beira.

But, there’s a lot flooding that is not so easy to see in the True Color that shows up better in the Natural Color RGB:

Animation comparing NOAA-20 Natural Color RGB images from 1 March 2019 and 25 March 2019

Animation comparing NOAA-20 Natural Color RGB images from 1 March 2019 and 25 March 2019

Since this VIIRS Natural Color imagery has twice the resolution of True Color, this animation is too large for WordPress to play it automatically. You have to click on it to see the animation play.

We’ve talked before about differences between True Color and Natural Color when it comes to flooding, and this example shows it quite well. You see, True Color can miss flooding, because water is pretty transparent at visible wavelengths. If the water is clear, you can see through it and, from the perspective of VIIRS, you see the ground underneath the water (as long as the water is relatively shallow). If the water is muddy, like most of this flooding, it’s easier to see (since radiation reflects off the particles in the water), but it can look the same as the mud (or bare ground) that isn’t covered by water.

Natural Color uses longer wavelengths, where water is much more absorbing, so water appears nearly black. That’s why it is typically easier to see flooding against a background of non-flooded land in Natural Color than True Color. But, the flooding around Beira is so muddy, the high reflectivity in the visible channel (which is the blue component of the RGB) starts to win out, and the floodwater appears more blue than black.

We can prove it by looking at the individual bands that make up these RGB composites. Remember to click to play the animations for the I-bands:

Comparison of NOAA-20 channel I-1 images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 VIIRS channel I-1 (0.64 µm) images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 channel I-2 images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 VIIRS channel I-2 (0.87 µm) images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 channel I-3 images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 VIIRS channel I-3 (1.61 µm) images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Note that the flooded areas look brighter in I-1 (thanks to the dirty water) and look darker in I-2 and I-3 (because they are less sensitive to the dirt in the water and more sensitive to the water itself).

The individual M-bands that comprise the True Color RGB, shown below, have been corrected for Rayleigh scattering and scaled the same as in the True Color images above:

Comparison of NOAA-20 channel M-3 images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 VIIRS channel M-3 (0.48 µm) images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 channel M-4 images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 VIIRS channel M-4 (0.55 µm) images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 channel M-5 images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

Comparison of NOAA-20 VIIRS channel M-5 (0.67 µm) images from 1 March and 25 March 2019

It is quite difficult to detect the flooding using the visible channels (M-3, M-4, M-5 and I-1) alone. But, the flooded areas are generally brighter in the “after” images. However, the water is easy to see in the shortwave IR channels (I-2, and I-3 along with M-7 and M-10, which were not shown).

Of course, this was a very long-winded way of looking at the flooding. We could have just used the JPSS Program’s official Flood Product made with VIIRS, created by researchers at George Mason University. Here is a three day composite image (composited to reduce the impact of clouds), covering 19-22 March 2019:

NOAA-20 VIIRS Flood Detection Product using a 3-day cloud-free composite (19-22 March 2019)

NOAA-20 VIIRS Flood Detection Product using a 3-day cloud-free composite (19-22 March 2019). Image courtesy S. Li (GMU).

Red and yellow areas show where flooding is detected. Gray areas are areas that were cloudy all three days. As an interesting side note, this product is validated against the Natural Color RGB. For more on this product, click here. If you want to know how much precipitation actually fell, here is a loop provided by NASA made with observations from GPM (Global Precipitation Measurement Mission):

You get bonus points if you can read the scale below the images. But, even without a magnifying glass, you can probably guess: it’s a lot of rain!

Rare Super Cyclone in the Indian Ocean

The Indian Ocean has just had its first Super Cyclone since 2007. The name of it is “Phailin” and I bet you just pronounced it incorrectly (unless you speak Thai). It’s closer to “PIE-leen” than it is to “FAY-lin”. The name was derived from the Thai word for sapphire. (If you go to Google Translate and translate “sapphire” into Thai, you can click on the “audio” icon {that looks like a speaker} in the lower right corner of the text box to hear a robotic voice pronounce it. You can also click on the fourth suggested translation below the text box and try to pronounce that as well.)

If you’re tired of reading about flooding in this blog, you’re probably going to want to avoid reading about Phailin. It already dumped up to 735 mm (28.9 inches) of rain on the Andaman Islands in a 72-hour period. Aside from the heavy rains, Phailin is a text-book example of “rapid intensification”, as official estimates of the storm’s intensity grew from 35 kt (65 km h-1 or 40 mph) when the storm was first named, to 135 kt (250 km h-1 or 155 mph!) just 48 hours later. Here’s a loop of what that rapid intensification looks like from the geostationary satellite, Meteosat-7. (Those are the Andaman Islands where the cyclone first forms.)

VIIRS being on a polar-orbiting satellite, it’s not possible to get an image of the cyclone every 30 minutes like you can with Meteosat-7. VIIRS only views a cyclone like Phailin twice per day. But, VIIRS can do things that Meteosat-7 can’t. The first is produce infrared (IR) imagery at 375 m resolution. (Meteosat-7 has 5 km resolution.) The image below is from the high resolution IR band, taken at 20:04 UTC 10 October 2013:

VIIRS high-resolution IR image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 20:04 UTC 10 October 2013

VIIRS high-resolution IR image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 20:04 UTC 10 October 2013

Look at the structure of the clouds surrounding the eye. (You’re definitely going to want to see it at full resolution by clicking on the image, then on the “3875×3019” link below the banner.) VIIRS is detecting wave features in the eyewall that other current IR sensors aren’t able to detect because they don’t have the resolution. The coldest cloud tops are found in the rainband to the west of the eyewall (look for that purple color) and are 179 K (-94 °C). That’s pretty cold!

Also notice the brightness temperature gradient on the west side of the eye is a lot sharper than on the east side of the eye. This is because the satellite is west of eye (the nadir line is along the left edge of the plotted data), looking down on the storm at an angle, revealing details about the side of the eyewall on the east side. Look down on the inside of a cardboard tube or a piece of pipe at an angle to replicate the effect. (Actually, the eye wall of a tropical cyclone slopes away from the center, so it’s more like funnel than a tube. If you go looking for a cardboard tube or a piece of pipe to look at, the results will be inaccurate. Grab a funnel instead.)

Another advantage of VIIRS is the Day/Night Band, a broadband visible channel that is sensitive to the low levels of light that occur at night. There is no geostationary satellite in space with this capability. The image below was taken from the Day/Night Band at the same time as the IR image above:

VIIRS Day/Night Band image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 20:04 UTC 10 October 2013

VIIRS Day/Night Band image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 20:04 UTC 10 October 2013

The Day/Night Band shows the eye clearly. Plus, being able to see the city lights gives an idea of the amount of people and infrastructure that are in the storm’s path.

Now, hold on a minute. 10 October 2013 was one day before first quarter moon, which means the moon was below the horizon when this image was taken. (Generally speaking, the moon is only up for nighttime VIIRS overpasses that occur from two days after first quarter to two days after last quarter.) If you want get more specific, India is one of the few places with a half-hour offset from most time zones (UTC +5:30), which means this image was taken at a local time of 1:34 AM 11 October 2013. Local moonrise time for the eastern coast of India for that date was 11:33 AM (10 hours later), while the moonset occurred 3.5 hours earlier (10:02 PM). This means you should be asking the obvious question: if there was no moonlight (and obviously no sunlight either, since this a nighttime image), why is VIIRS able to see the cyclone?

Was it the scattering of city lights off the clouds that allows you to see the clouds at night, like in this photo? No, because this cyclone is way out over the ocean, in the middle of the Bay of Bengal. Due to the curvature of the Earth, city lights won’t illuminate any clouds more than a few tens of kilometers away. The center of this storm is about 600 km away from any city lights and is still visible. At the most, only the very edges of the storm near cities would be illuminated if this were the case.

I can see at least two lightning strikes in the image, so is it lightning illuminating the cloud from the inside? No, it’s not that either. See how streaky the lightning appears? The whole storm would look like a series streaks, some brighter than others, depending on how close they were to the tops of the clouds (and how close the lightning was to the position of the VIIRS sensor’s field of view during each scan). The top of the storm is much too uniform in brightness for it to be caused by lightning.

So, if you’re so smart, what is the explanation, Mr. Smartypants? I’m glad you asked. It is a phenomenon called “airglow” (or sometimes “nightglow” when it occurs at night). You can read more about it here and here. The basic idea is that gas molecules in the upper atmosphere interact with ultraviolet (UV) radiation and emit light. Some of these light emissions head down toward the earth’s surface, are reflected back to space by the clouds, and detected by the satellite.

Really? Some tiny amount of gas molecules way up in the atmosphere emit a very faint light due to excitation by UV radiation, and you’re telling me VIIRS can see it? But, it’s nighttime! There’s no UV radiation at night! How do you explain that? The UV radiation breaks up the molecules into individual atoms during the day. At night, the atoms recombine back into molecules. That’s when they emit the light. Look, it’s in a peer-reviewed scientific journal if you don’t believe me. (A shortened press release about it is here.) Thanks to airglow (and the sensitivity of the Day/Night Band), VIIRS can see visible-wavelength images of storms at night even when there is no moon!

Getting back to the Super Cyclone, here’s what Phailin looked like in the high-resolution IR channel the next night (19:45 UTC 11 October 2012), right around the time where it reached its maximum intensity:

VIIRS channel I-05 image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 19:45 UTC 11 October 2013

VIIRS channel I-05 image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 19:45 UTC 11 October 2013

Here, the cyclone is much closer to nadir (the nadir line passes through the center of the image), so you’re more-or-less looking straight down into the eye on this orbit. The corresponding Day/Night Band image is below:

VIIRS Day/Night Band image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 19:45 UTC 11 October 2013

VIIRS Day/Night Band image of Super Cyclone Phailin, taken 19:45 UTC 11 October 2013

Once again, the cyclone is illuminated by airglow. (Some of the outer rainbands are also being lit up by city lights, which are visible through the clouds.) The only question is, what is that bright thing off the coast of Burma (Myanmar) that shows up in both Day/Night Band images? It looks like a huge, floating city. According to Google Maps, there’s nothing there. That is one question I don’t have the answer to (*see Update #2*).

Any other questions about cyclones in India? Check out this FAQ guide put out by the India Meteorological Department.

With a peak intensity estimate at 140 kts (259 km h-1 or 161 mph), Phailin was one of the strongest cyclones ever in the Indian Ocean. (Only 2007’s Gonu – 145 kt – was stronger. Several other storms have been estimated at 140 kt.) The last time a cyclone of Phailin’s intensity hit India, over 10,000 people died. Credit must be given to the Indian government, who successfully evacuated 900,000 people from the coast (the article refers to 9.1 lakhs; one lakh is 100,000), and so far, only about 25 people have been confirmed dead. In fact, fewer people were killed by this cyclone than were killed by a panicked stampede outside a temple in central India the same weekend.

 

UPDATE #1 (15 October 2013): The Day/Night Band also captured the power outages caused by Phailin. Here is a side-by-side comparison of Day/Night Band images along the coast of the state of Odisha (also called Orissa), which took a direct hit from the cyclone – a zoomed in and labelled version of the 10 October image above (two days before landfall) against a similar image from 14 October 2013 (two days after landfall):

VIIRS Day/Night Band images from before and after Super Cyclone Phailin made landfall along the east coast of India.

VIIRS Day/Night Band images from before and after Super Cyclone Phailin made landfall along the east coast of India.

Notice the lack of lights in and around the small city of Berhampur. That’s roughly where Phailin made landfall. Also, notice the difference in appearance of the metropolitan area of Calcutta. It almost appears as if the city was cut in two as a result of electricity being out in large parts of the city.

 

UPDATE #2 (15 October 2013): Thanks to Renate B., we’ve figured out the bright lights over the Bay of Bengal near the coast of Myanmar (Burma) are due to offshore oil and gas operations. Take a look at the map on this website. See the yellow box marked “A1 & A3”? That is a hotly contested area for gas and oil drilling, right where the bright lights are. It is claimed by Burma (Myanmar) and India, China and South Korea are all invested in it. China has built a pipeline out to the site that cuts right through Myanmar (Burma) that some of the locals are not happy about.

 

UPDATE #3 (16 October 2013): It was pointed out to me that the maximum IR brightness temperature in the eye of the cyclone in the 20:04 UTC 10 October 2013 image was 297.5 K (24.4 °C), which is pretty warm for a hurricane/cyclone/typhoon eye. It is rare for the observed IR brightness temperature inside the eye to exceed 25-26 °C. Of course, the upper limit is the sea surface temperature, which is rarely above 31-33 °C. And the satellite’s spatial resolution affects the observed brightness temperature, along with a number of other factors.

A warm eye is related to a lack of clouds in (or covering up) the eye, the eye being large enough to see all the way to the surface at the viewing angle of satellite, the satellite having high enough spatial resolution to identify pixels that don’t contain cloud, and the underlying sea surface temperature. Powerful, slow moving storms may churn the waters enough to mix cooler water from the thermocline up into the surface layer, reducing the sea surface temperature. Heavy rains and cloud cover from the storm may also lower the sea surface temperature. Phailin was generally over 28-29 °C water, and was apparently moving fast enough (or the warm water was deep enough) to not mix too much cool water from below (a process called upwelling).

It may or may not have any practical implications, but the high resolution IR imagery VIIRS is able to produce may break some records on warmest brightness temperature ever observed in a tropical cyclone eye.

End of Autumn in the Alps

Much of the United States has had a below-average amount of snow this fall (and below-average precipitation for the whole year). Look at how little snow cover there was in the month of November. Parts of Europe, however, have seen snow. It’s nice to know that it’s falling somewhere. But, can you tell where?

Here is a visible image (0.6 µm) from Meteosat-9, taken 12 December 2012 (at 12:00 UTC):

Meteosat-9 visible image of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012

Meteosat-9 visible image of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012. Image courtesy EUMETSAT.

And here’s the infrared image (10.8 µm) from the same time:

Meteosat-9 IR-window image of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012

Meteosat-9 IR-window image of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012. Image courtesy EUMETSAT.

These are images provided by EUMETSAT. Can you tell where the snow is? Or what is snow and what is cloud?

Here’s a much higher resolution image from VIIRS (zoomed in the Alps), taken only 3 minutes later:

VIIRS visible image of central Europe, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

VIIRS visible image (channel I-01) of central Europe, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

Now is it easy to differentiate clouds from snow? Just changing the resolution doesn’t help that much.

This has long been a problem for satellites operating in visible to infrared wavelengths. Visible-wavelength channels detect clouds based on the fact that they are highly reflective (just like snow). Infrared (IR) channels are sensitive to the temperature of the objects they’re looking at, and detect clouds because they are usually cold (just like snow). So, it can be difficult to distinguish between the two. If you had a time lapse loop of images, you’d most likely see the clouds move, while the snow stays put (or disappears because it is melting). But, what if you only had one image? What if the clouds were anchored to the terrain and didn’t move? How would you detect snow in these cases?

EUMETSAT has developed several RGB composites to help identify snow. The Daytime Microphysics RGB (link goes to PowerPoint file) looks like this:

Meteosat-9 "Daytime Microphysics" RGB composite of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012

Meteosat-9 "Daytime Microphysics" RGB composite of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012. Image courtesy EUMETSAT.

Snow is hot pink (magenta), which shows up pretty well. Clouds are a multitude of colors based on type, particle size, optical thickness, and phase. That whole PowerPoint file linked above is designed to help you understand all the different colors.

The Daytime Microphysics RGB uses a reflectivity calculation for the 3.9 µm channel (the green channel of the RGB). Without bothering to do that calculation, I’ve replaced the reflectivity at 3.9 µm with the reflectivity at 2.25 µm (M-11) when applying this RGB product to VIIRS, and produced a similar result:

VIIRS "Daytime Microphysics" RGB composite of the Alps, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

VIIRS "Daytime Microphysics" RGB composite of the Alps, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

Except for the wavelength difference of the green channel (and minor differences between the VIIRS channels and Meteosat channels), everything else is kept the same as the official product definition. Once again, the snow is pink, in sharp contrast to the clouds and the snow-free surfaces. We won’t bother to show the Nighttime Microphysics/Fog RGB (link goes to PowerPoint file) since this is a daytime scene.

EUMETSAT has also developed a Snow RGB (link goes to PowerPoint file):

Meteosat-9 "Snow" RGB composite of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012

Meteosat-9 "Snow" RGB composite of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012. Image courtesy EUMETSAT.

This also uses the reflectivity calculated for the 3.9 µm channel. Plus, it uses a gamma correction for the blue and green channels. Is it just me, or does snow show up better in the Daytime Microphysics RGB?

If you switch out the 3.9 µm for the 2.25 µm channel again and skip the gamma correction when creating this RGB composite for VIIRS, the snow stands out a lot more:

VIIRS "Snow" RGB (with modifications as explained in the text), taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

VIIRS "Snow" RGB (with modifications as explained in the text), taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

Now you have snow ranging from pink to red with gray land areas, black water and pale blue to light pink clouds. This combination of channels makes snow identification easier than the official “Snow RGB”, I think.

All of this is well and good but, for my money, nothing beats what EUMETSAT calls the “natural color” RGB. I have referred to it as the “pseudo-true color“. Here’s the low-resolution EUMETSAT image:

Meteosat-9 "Natural Color" RGB of central Europe, taken 12:00 UTC 12 December 2012. Image courtesy EUMETSAT.

And the higher resolution VIIRS image:

VIIRS "Natural Color" RGB of central Europe, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

VIIRS "Natural Color" RGB composite of channels M-5, M-7 and M-10, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

The VIIRS image above uses the moderate resolution channels M-5, M-7 and M-10, although this RGB composite can be made with the high-resolution imagery channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, which basically have the same wavelengths and twice the horizontal resolution. Below is the highest resolution offered by VIIRS (cropped down slightly to reduce memory usage when plotting the data):

VIIRS "Natural Color" RGB composite of channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

VIIRS "Natural Color" RGB composite of channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, taken 12:03 UTC 12 December 2012

Make sure to click on the image and then on the “2594×1955” link below the banner to see the image in full resolution.

This RGB composite is easier on the eyes and easier to understand. Snow has high reflectivity in M-5 (I-01) and M-7 (I-02) but low reflectivity in M-10 (I-03) so, when combined in the RGB image, it shows up as cyan. Liquid clouds have high reflectivity in all three channels so it shows up as white (or dirty, off-white). The only source of contention is that ice clouds, if they’re thick enough, will also show up as cyan.

Except for the cyan snow and ice, the “natural color” RGB is otherwise similar to a “true color” image. Vegetation shows up green, unlike the other RGB composites where it has been gray or purple or a very yellowish green. That makes it more intuitive for the average viewer. You don’t need to read an entire guide book to understand all the colors that you’re seeing.

Compare all of these RGB composites against the single channel images at the top of the page. They all make it easier to distinguish clouds from snow, although some work better than others. Now compare the VIIRS images with the Meteosat images. Which ones look better?

(To be fair, it’s not all Meteosat’s fault. The images provided by EUMETSAT are low-resolution JPG files [which is a lossy-compression format]. The VIIRS images shown here are loss-less PNG files, which are much larger files to have to store and they require more bandwidth to display.)

As a bonus (consider it your Christmas bonus), here are a few more high-resolution “natural color” images of snow and low clouds over the Alps. These are kept at a 4:3 width-to-height ratio and a 16:9 ratio, so they make ideal desktop wallpapers.

VIIRS "natural color" composite of channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, taken 12:29 UTC 14 November 2012

VIIRS "natural color" composite of channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, taken 12:29 UTC 14 November 2012. This is an ideal desktop wallpaper for 4:3 ratio monitors.

That was the 4:3 ratio image. Here’s the 16:9 ratio image:

VIIRS "natural color" composite of channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, taken 12:29 UTC 14 November 2012

VIIRS "natural color" composite of channels I-01, I-02 and I-03, taken 12:29 UTC 14 November 2012. This is an ideal desktop wallpaper for 16:9 ratio monitors.

Enjoy the snow (or be glad you don’t have to drive in it)!