Amazing New Mars Photos...Just Read...

Ok, I'm sorry if these have already been posted on this forum, but it looks like these have just been very recently released. They are pictures from the Rover and Opportunity, only they're not like any other pictures you've seen of Mars before. These pictures are true color pictures of Mars, as if you were an astronaut on the surface of Mars, taking a picture of the surface with a digital camera. They look amazing, and there's a lot of them. Here's an example of one:





There is WAY more on this website to see, all sorts of different pictures in different landscapes. I'm going to go through them tomorrow as I'm way too tired to do it tonight, but I figured I'd post the website on here so you guys can have a head start...I'm going to look through every picture tomorrow just to see what I can find, but regardless these pictures are amazing, and kind of ...I don't know...is eerie a good word? Well regardless, enjoy!

www.areo.info...

reply to post by matth


Thanks Matt, great pics! I have saved them on my computer and intend to go over every inch! Great post.

Yeah the pictures are pretty amazing. Finnally some good pictures of mars surface. Saw this first on a youtube video and came here to see if there was a thread about it

Some damn good pictures here like this:

Hey what is the deal with all of those blue pebbles I keep seeing in all sorts of pictures? I don't know anything about rocks or anything geological, but they look really interesting...but then again there's a lot of interesting things I'm finding in these pictures:






Blah I've got to force myself off that website (and this one too, haha) for the night or I'm going to be here all night and not get any sleep...peace everyone!

reply to post by matth


Those are not true colour images.

The images from that site that have names ending in "L2L5L5L7L7" are created with images from infrared+green+green+green+violet filters, and as you can see with an image of the sun-dial, those do not result in true colours.



It should look like this.


You can see that the blue and green colour patches look completely wrong.

Unfortunately, many Sols have only images from those filters and it's impossible to create a true colour images only with those.

reply to post by ArMaP


Well. That depends on which filters are used for each picture.

From the site: www.areo.info...

What the image numbers mean:
The image IDs shown on this website are derived from the original image IDs of the raw data. For example the suffix _L3L4L5L6L7 means that the filters L3+L4 for red, L5 for green and L6+L7 for blue are used.

The first part of the ID is a copy of the green filtered (L5) original image ID. A description to decode that number is given on marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov.

Images with suffix _L4L5L5L5L6 give the best available color reproduction.

So a picture like this will be as true color as we get from up there now:



And the site claim's them to be true color:

On this website you find true color images taken by the Panoramic Camera on each of the Marsrovers Spirit and Opportunity. This is how images would look like, if an astronaut on the surface of Mars took images with a 1 Megapixel digital camera and sent them back to Earth via a planet wide Internet. That means, the colors appear the same as the astronaut would see them.

What is most suprising to me is that the sky is blue like here on earth..
If the images here are to believed...

Double post.. :/
Could a mod delete this if you happen to come by here

[edit on 3-8-2008 by cadric]

Hmm, could someone explain why are the Mars photos done in such a... strange way? Why don't the landers use a "normal" digital camera to capture everything in true color? Is the atmosphere so different from the Earth's that taking a photo with my cheap digicam wouldn't produce any true colors?

reply to post by cadric

Yes, it depends on the filters, that is why I said those (the photos with names ending in "L2L5L5L7L7", like those posted by matth and cadric) were not true colour images.

It was not my intention (but maybe that was what you, and probably other people, thought) to say that all the images from that site were not true colour images.

And yes, they claim to have true colour images on the site, but they do not say that all the images are true colour, right?

The image with the sun-dial is a good example of an image on that site that is not true colour.

If these photos are what a photo taken on Mars by an astronaut would look like is a different thing.

Based on what I have seen, NASA would probably present something like this as "true colour".


PS: as NASA has not yet provided the radiometrically-corrected images I cannot say if a radiometrically-corrected image from NASA would really look like the one I posted above, that is just a guess based on my conclusions from yesterday's readings and testings.

reply to post by relu84


Because having different filters for specific wave-lengths is better to identify different things.

That is why they use eight different infra-red filters.

reply to post by relu84


A "normal" digital camera also captures the raw image in black-and-white and viewed through colored filters in the exact same way. The "CMOS" or "CCD" in your home digital camera then takes those black-and-white photos viewed through different filters and takes an educated "guess" at what the actual color should be and gives you your "color" image. This all happens almost instantaneously, so you never notice it.

The difference with the rovers is that the black-and-white raw images (as seen through the various filters) are what is returned to Earth, rather than the "completed" color picture. The software used to put the raw black-and-white images together are here on earth so that the imaging scientists can do various things with the raw iamges to get other images, such as false-color images that will help certain materils stand out againts other materials.

As ArMap said, the black-and-white raw images are much more valuble to the imaging scientists for this reason.

So there is no such thing as a "true color" digital camera.

Wow really nice. Thanks a lot for sharing







Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 3-8-2008 by Jbird]

Lol, I found this website before and created a thread on it too, more directed at the possibility that NASA has been editing the images to make them look less hospitable, or at least to entertain the possibility.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Anyway, I found this on that website and posted it there, but as this has gone further than mine, I'll add it here

"Just found this on the site, there seems to be something buried into the ground, partially obscured, is this part of the lander?

SPIRIT: SOL 1431:8 2P253399549EFFAX05P2564L5M1_L4L5L5L5L6
Is this a measuring device from the lander? can anyone identify this? it seems to be part of the rock, embedded into it.

EMM"

[edit on 3-8-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

[edit on 3-8-2008 by ElectroMagnetic Multivers]

Interesting!

The first thing I noticed... and it stuck out like a sore thumb to me, was the 2nd link posted on the OP.

Here is the link again

www.areo.info...

In the lower left quadrant of the photo, along what looks like layered rock, there appears to be a whitish object that does not match with the rest of the rock.

After zooming in on the pic, the anomaly looks like a bust or a statue of some sort of a humanoid figure.

I zoomed in close and it doesn't appear as though the photo was manipulated to add that in, but I don't know much about photography. Only reporting what I see.

Hopefully someone else out there can help figure out if it's actually part of the picture as taken, or if it was manipulated later.

I also see a bunch of white specs in the photos. What are those? Reminds me of paint splatter.

reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers


That is a mark made by the abrasion tool from the rover on one of those slab-like stones.

reply to post by ArMaP


Sorry I did not use exact proper wording when I posted this link last night. I was half asleep and should of looked through my exact wording more carefully. I just thought the website was neat and the pictures looked amazing, although I should of used my exact wordings more carefully...

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


I am sorry I used to term "digital camera", as I am not a digital camera expert and shouldn't of used that term without knowing as much as you do about digital cameras and photography. I was just trying to find a way to explain some of the pictures in a "normal person" way so that people like me (ie, people who know nothing about photography, hehe) might understand better...but I was mistaken. My apologies!

reply to post by Ceara


Very interesting note Ceara! Would you happen to have a picture of the zoomed in portion of that original photograph to post on here? I am Photoshop illiterate and don't know how to do it for myself, but I notice what you're talking about on the picture and would love to get a closer look!

PS to ElectroMagnetic Multivers, I'm sorry for stealing your thread...that's a cool picture none the less...a star for you!

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers

 

That is a mark made by the abrasion tool from the rover on one of those slab-like stones.

I agree. The stone seems to be heavily laden with hematite (note the blue tinge on the edges of the other "stones"). The round spot seems to be exposed, fresh hematite.

It would seem that this is some kind of sandstone, would it not? That would explain why it was so rich in hematite (although it still isn't explained why the iron is hematite in some regiongs, and an oxide in other regions).

reply to post by ArMaP


Someone else mentioned it was a 'scrape' on the rock, but how can it keep it's 'definition', if this was the case, i'd say it was 'stamped' more than scraped. I just don't see how it would happen that way, I may be misunderstanding you.

EMM