Mars Image: Building (Pics)

reply to post by super70


As far as I know, we do not get colour images because separate colours have advantages over full spectrum photos.

I don't know why HiRISE has only a blue+green filter and not two separate filters for those colours (or more correctly, frequencies), but HRSC, one of the experiments on Mars Express, has the three filters to make colour images.

MARCI has seven filters because they wanted to see better the clouds and dust storms on Mars, so they chose filters that would show better those things that were their primary targets.

reply to post by zorgon


What is Garvin's 'artifact'?

The one in the image from the NASA presentation beside the Humphrey 'fossil'

THIS ONE



[edit on 22-7-2008 by zorgon]

These are my discoveries today, what appears to be a complex of buildings. The main structure is the most compelling.

Originally posted by super70
I have a question, and please excuse my ignorance of the issue, but why aren't we being given real color photos of mars? Im confused!

NASA does not want you to see them... why I do not know...

ArMaP says he posted the 'dark'one because that is how he found it... but if you look at the Rover site at the same image in black and white it is BRIGHT not DARK... so why... when they show us a color print is it suddenly dark and red?

Take the dark one and grey scale it... it will not match the B&W one at NASA... ArMaP is a hard worker to be sure but I disagree with his interpretation of the filters

Here is a report from Lockheed Martin on the Color issue

Color Calibration of Spirit and Opportunity Rover Images
mars.spherix.com...

The image in the "Garvin" artifact above is color... it is color from NASA so they do have them...

For those who have not seen this in other threads the story of the "Garvin' artifact is that the clip is taken from a NASA presentation that also shows this...



Now the problem I have with this is that the trilobite fossil is an obvious fake... We found the rock in question (ArMaP and myself) It is known as "Humphrey" and is a piece of Basalt that the rover drilled into... Trilobites are NOT found in basalt...

Yet this was part of a presentation by Dr Jim Garvin to a group of scientists at a symposium.



Here is the cover of the PDF that I will link at the end... but I know few follow links



That is what NASA thinks of us

Here is the infamous slide... the artifact is on the left...



Here is my page on this...

www.thelivingmoon.com...

and here is the PDF link...

www.nasa.gov...

Now my problem is that while Humphrey was easy to spot, the image containing Garvin's artifact is not as all it shows is a bunch of rocks... and Garvin was not kind enough to provide us an image number... I wrote him and there was no response...

Maybe someone else would have better luck.. I am not exactly unknown at NASA

www.nasa.gov...

core2.gsfc.nasa.gov...


So what is the purpose of this presentation?

Is it a joke? They should have said so

The fossil is obviously a fake... so that proves NASA does indeed deliberately confuse the issue... a point I do not understand that everyone misses...

The artifact if it is indeed in that Rover image would be a smoking gun worthy of the Smithsonian..

But with Spirit: All 110,007 Raw Images and Opportunity: All 106,848 Raw Images its going to take a very very long tedious search to match those rocks and either find the artifact or prove its not really there...

But we need to find it... this would convince everyone..

marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

Happy Hunting

Hehe maybe we should offer a reward...

reply to post by zorgon


Oh, that Garvin!

I thought the name sounded familiar. I am needing my vacations...

Originally posted by zorgon
ArMaP says he posted the 'dark'one because that is how he found it... but if you look at the Rover site at the same image in black and white it is BRIGHT not DARK... so why... when they show us a color print is it suddenly dark and red?

From what I have seen, all the images on the rovers' site (and other publicised places) are brighter than the ones available on the less known PDS sites.

I usually like to use those darker images because they were not "stretched" (in terms of light, not shape) as the ones on the rovers' site, when we can sometimes see that there was loss of detail because of excessive brightening of the photo (I think you said once that the colour images made with those images looked better than the ones made with the brighter images).

reply to post by super70


Super 70, verrrry nice finds ! On your pic of Dome 2, it almost looks as if theres extra features possibly still there with the dome. Who knows ? Well, for that reason if I may ask - could we kindly get your source? Much appreciated.

spikeD.

[edit on 22-7-2008 by spikedmilk]

reply to post by zorgon


Maybe I should have looked for that image before (but some of the information I used to look for it is something that I did not knew last week), it took me less than 30 minutes.

That image is from Spirit, Sol 36, and the rock is the "white boat".
White boat

And although they say here (at the middle of the page) that this is a red-green-blue image (whatever that means), it does not match my composite with images 2P129573555EFF0361P2582L4M1, 2P129573596EFF0361P2582L5M1 and 2P129573638EFF0361P2582L6M1 from the Rover's site


or the same images from the PDS.



PS: obviously, there are no strange objects in that photo.

Edited to add the image made from the "Radiometrically-corrected RDR calibrated to absolute radiance units" version of the three images, it looks much better. (I must see what that long name means )



[edit on 22/7/2008 by ArMaP]

Originally posted by ArMaP
Oh, that Garvin!
I thought the name sounded familiar. I am needing my vacations...

Hehe Nice work ArMaP

So now the question is....

Did they edit it out of the images you found...

Or did they add it in deliberately to the presentation...

Hey come to Vegas... I will show you around... and you can get your picture taken in front of the Area 51 sign

30 minutes huh?

Hmmm maybe you DO work for 'them' after all

[edit on 22-7-2008 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


kinda looks like the door handel from a 60's /70's model car...

reply to post by ArMaP


Yeah okay...I am going through some computer problems for the next couple weeks but REALLY would like to know where you got the L2 L5 and L6 of the "petrified log" AND the fact these images do NOT show the rover's tracks running over it like the NavCam images do...what's up with THAT little issue?



I may have posted "off-topic" about the Surveyor links to help Zargon in his quest to find Moon data rather than Mars data but that was meant in a BRIEF helpful manner and was not meant to derail the thread topic. So I apologize...if the "petrified log" itself is "off-topic" since we are only 'supposed' to be talking about square "blocks" then yup I am quilty by posting loooong "blocks" i.e. the petrified one. Promise I'll try to be more 'on-point' in the future... I just wish there was an email reply to threads when they get replies so I can track them better.

But yes PLEASE...either post or email me info on where and which SOL you found these PanCam images of the "petrified log" apparently BEFORE it rolled up the hill and over it to get the original NavCam images I linked to.

Thanx very much in advance

Bob...
commonsensecentral.net...

Originally posted by scorand
reply to post by zorgon

 

kinda looks like the door handel from a 60's /70's model car...

I thought it looked like a PT Cruiser Handle.. :-/
passenger side... :-p

Interesting cylinder shaped "stones."



The "main structure" is very intriguing, anyone care to comment on that one? Very odd geometric shape considering the surrounding terrain.





[edit on 23-7-2008 by super70]

Originally posted by rhw007
Yeah okay...I am going through some computer problems for the next couple weeks but REALLY would like to know where you got the L2 L5 and L6 of the "petrified log" AND the fact these images do NOT show the rover's tracks running over it like the NavCam images do...what's up with THAT little issue?

I hadn't noticed that the tracks were not there!

Promise I'll try to be more 'on-point' in the future...

I just wish there was an email reply to threads when they get replies so I can track them better.

I said that more as a joke (but based on real events, as they say in the movies ), but it's something that I try to avoid (although I have commited that fault myself some times) because it can change completely the flow of the thread, and a thread that was about some subject is changed into something completely different.

But yes PLEASE...either post or email me info on where and which SOL you found these PanCam images of the "petrified log" apparently BEFORE it rolled up the hill and over it to get the original NavCam images I linked to.

I will post it, this information is publicly available, so there is no reason not to share it with anyone interested in it.

I found that image on the PDS Imaging Node site. From the Missions page I selected Mars Exploration Rover - Opportunity and then the On-line Data Volumes, which took me to this page.

I had seen this page before, many times, but this time I chose the "OPS Mosaic RDRs" data volume. Apparantely, NASA makes a panorama for each of sites visited by the rovers (it makes sense).

The mosaics are ordered by site, not by Sol, and as that photo of the "petrified log" is from site 27 (it says so on the image file name, for example, image 1N138388241EFF2700P1994L0M1 is from site 27, location 00) I went looking for site 27.

So, after choosing the Mosaic data volume, the "Browse" folder, then the "Pancam" folder, we reach a folder with the available sites, and by choosing "Site0028" (there is not site 27 for the Pancam) we reach a folder with 39 mosaics, some of which (the ones with the bigger file sizes) are complete panoramas.

If instead of the "Browse" folder you choose the "Extras" folder you have the "Catalog" and "Thumbnail" folders, who have the same files as the "Browse" folder but in smaller sizes.

The "Data" folder, as usual, has the files in IMG format.

ArMap,

Thank you very much. I have emailed the link to my machine 2 which while still having USB issues and am in process of "dumping to dvd" the data in prep for a re-install ( I know 'off-topic' with computer issues sorry but needed to explain) I will try and download and save the Site 28 IMGs for NASAview or Gimp opening and burn them to dvd for future work and may start a seperate thread on this in the future. So it's to let you know your help, while it may not show up for a few weeks WILL be worked on in the future at some point when both machines are back to 100% working order.

ON TOPIC...

I have 'outlined' a lot of "Square Blocks" from my Fall 2007 Mars Quest Challenge where I got to target the MRO on my Cydonia Smoking Pyramid. While the whole page about it with the MOCs is here:

commonsensecentral.net...

The update AFTER the MRO acquired my targeted request is here:

commonsensecentral.net...

And I have two of the image strips I took, ran through NASAView, then destriped and contrast balanced to better show the terrain...two images are with the "blocks"...one annotated with blocks circled and one as it is without annotation:

commonsensecentral.net...

commonsensecentral.net...

The release of the actual MRO image was done TWICE as the update page shows the March 5, 2008 release WITHOUT NASA "comments" and then the following release recently WITH NASA "comments". One has to wonder why it would be necessar to re-release apreviously released image with additional "comments".

this is now the "official" release as it stands today:

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

The update page has other features I used the individual strips to get a better over-all contrast balance so that features were not 'washed out' as in the official release including the top portion of the "pyramid".

Again...thank you for the info on the "petrified stone log" and where to find the images...what is STILL puzzling since I don't doubt your work...is HOW the rover got PanCam images in COLOR that did NOT show the rover's tracks as it climbed that hill...rolled OVER the log FIRST as the NavCam images show...yet the PanCam images do not... very very puzzling as there is only ONE set of tracks on the NavCam images as it rolled up and over the thing...yet the tracks 'vanish' in the PanCam from the other side of the "petrified stone log" AFTER it rolled over it.

Bob...

First of all, sorry for prolonging an off-topic, but as this was posted before, I think that I should post this correction here.

After a more careful examination of all the data available, I reached the conclusion that the images for the panorama are available on the Rover's site.

Images 1P139021295EFF2809P2266L2M1, 1P139021295EFF2809P2266R2M1, 1P139021392EFF2809P2266L5M1, 1P139021392EFF2809P2266R6M1, 1P139021483EFF2809P2266L6M1 and 1P139021483EFF2809P2266R7M1 look like the same from the panorama I posted before.

In conclusion, my "discovery" turned out to be just a way of seeing the panoramas.

But that is not that bad, the panoramas were one of the "tools" I used to find the photo of the "White Boat", it is easier to locate things in a panorama.

A deliberate leaked pic.

They are very methodical on how they leak, were they leak and when they leak!

reply to post by thetiler


So, do you know why they "leaked" that photo on that date?
And what about the other photos that were published at the same time?

Why would intelligent alien life go to a lifeless planet and carve out rocks to look like earthly objects and then cover up their tracks? Maybe because they don't, haven't, and what is imaged is not entirely clear as to what it is. Occam's Razor.