It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by mister.old.school
I confirmed the image does indeed have two paths. The first labeled "Lamont", and the second a default "path 1". This clearly indicates this image has likely been modified from the original.
Originally posted by Acharya
The white dots are damage on films, might be chemical damage, it is not easy to see in low resolution Lunar Orbiter images but simple to see on high resolution ones.
Spacecraft Altitude: 2716.89 km
Aldrin 1.4°N/22.1°E 3 km
Apollo 11 0.7°N/23.4°E - km
Arago 6.2°N/21.4°E 26 km
Armstrong 1.4°N/25.0°E 4 km
Collins 1.3°N/23.7°E 2 km
Delambre 1.9°S/17.5°E 51 km
Hypatia 4.3°S/22.6°E 40 km
Lamont 4.4°N/23.7°E 106 km
Manners 4.6°N/20.0°E 15 km
Mare Tranquillitatis 8.5°N/31.4°E 873 km
Moltke 0.6°S/24.2°E 6 km
Ranger 8 / km
Rimae Hypatia 0.4°S/22.4°E 206 km
Rimae Ritter 3.0°N/18.0°E 100 km
Rimae Sosigenes 8.6°N/18.7°E 190 km
Ritter 2.0°N/19.2°E 29 km
Sabine 1.4°N/20.1°E 30 km
Schmidt 1.0°N/18.8°E 11 km
Sinus Asperitatis 3.8°S/27.4°E 206 km
Surveyor 5 / km
Originally posted by Acharya
The white dots are damage on films, might be chemical damage, it is not easy to see in low resolution Lunar Orbiter images but simple to see on high resolution ones.
p.s. any one tell me how to embed my pics in my post?!?!
Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
If anyone comes across the Raw tif image for the first pic, please let us know.
Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
p.s. any one tell me how to embed my pics in my post?!?!
Originally posted by Acharya
Here is a high resolution version of the image that started this thread, as I previously stated the white marks looks like chemical damage on the film.
Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
it could be concievable that NASA would render the REAL anomalies there (maybe 5-10 dots) invisable by surrounding the area with other "questionable" anomalies.
This would allow them to leave the "airbrushing", instead just make the image inconclusive OR "obviously" damaged.
Or am i going abit TOO far there