Evidence that NASA is altering the true colours of the pictures of Mars

Originally posted by rocksarerocks
This doesn't prove anything, because you can't get up there and prove it, but even if the skies on mars were a blueish tint, so frikin what. Matters not one bit.

First of all, nothing being presented here is from the intent to prove anything other than the FACT that so many images released by NASA are very saturated in RED, thus making even a plain old rock or hill look very dull, very boaring and very un-interesting.

And perhaps to you, none of this matters. Maybe to you, a slight blue Martian sky doesnt matter. Maybe to you, it doesnt matter that your tax dollars are being spent by an agency that basically laughs in your face as you hand over your hard earned money and then slaps your face and give you a nice RED smack mark on the cheek.

Maybe to you, it doesnt matter that the public, which includes you, deserves MUCH more than what we get out of NASA. Dont you understand that we are paying for all these missions, all the hardware, the salaries of all the engineers, designers, scientists studying the data returned by these very expensive robotic probes and orbiters. Arent you at the very least wishing you had some sort of a return other than RED saturated images and a bunch of scientific garbbaly goo that only inspires a select few?

Well guess what my friend. It matters to many of us out here being left out in the cold while paying for their heat to stay nice and warm all cozy up with all that data and imagry we pay for.

This isnt about lack of data, or lack of images, or lack of scientific conclusions. It is about lack of inspiration, lack of public interest, lack of vision because of the lame ho hum boaring things we do get out of NASA.

Let the scientists get all that data and analyze it till they turn...(I love this pun)..till they turn BLUE in the brain. I do not think anyone here has any problem with the scientific aspects of these missions at all. What the problem is, is the lack of publicly understandable data, images and inspiration. And if that public inspiration and interest can be sparked by an image that is obviously not a representation of the scientific facts, so what! The mere fact that an image adjusted so that it is understandable and eye appealing to the non-scientific of the public and inspires that public to become interested in the space program again, well I for one dont see any reason why we cant use our right to be imaginative and creative if the end result is a renewed massive public interest.

And you know what else....all those red saturated images, all the ancillary data, all the science wont just dissapear. None of it will be changed by any means by our work, none of it will go away. It will always be there, as it is now, for those who want to dive into that arena of the space program.

No document anywhere in the entire NASA charter states that NASA is only for one specialized section of society. If it was intended only for the scientists and only for a specialized section of society, it would NOT be a civilian agency. It would NOT need public funding. It would then have reason, and justification, to be hiding data, hiding anomalies, and anything else it so desired because at that point, it would not be a public civilian agency, it would be a PRIVATE agency.

With all due respect, it doesnt matter that it doesnt matter to you. Im sorry that you have that point of view, and your certinaly entitled to that and no one has any power to change your prospective. I dont think anyone would even attempt to try to change your prospective. But I hope that you do realize, that you do not speak for the rest of society, only for yourself. And to some of us out here, IT DOES MATTER!




Cheers!!!!

I know this might be offtopic abit but I thought I would bring up interesting shapes I spotted on the image. I mean we are talking about a _dead_ _dry_ _planet_ so can someone explain to me what those rings are in the images?





Sorry in advance if this has been brought up and so forth by the time this post goes live... Thanks!

Red dust storm, Mildura, Victoria, Australia.

you guys are just freaking stubborn as hell huh...

they're photos of Earth... retouched to look like mars.. retouched with red hues to look like a.."red mars"

get a life.

freaking kids will go on for daaaays thinking imbecilic ideas without realizing the .. harsh.. damning...

truth..


lol. these kids will sTILL persist that they are photos from earth retouched to show that mars is not like earth...

still adopted to fantasy.. still adopted to the fact that nobody.. NO-ONE could EVER pull the covers over your eyes

...nobody in control of the theatrics could perform theatrics...

right kids?


fasten your seat belts back into your plato-cave -vault chairs .. and re-connect to what you've been "shown"...

it's what "really happens"...

so just.. shut up and swallow it lovingly.. with every symphonic gulp.


-
-

[edit on 12-12-2008 by prevenge]

Originally posted by Nohup
Red dust storm, Mildura, Victoria, Australia.

Indeed, a dusty, bad hair day!

With a little "inspiration", I can make the grass green again...and the sky a little blue....and it still can be seen that there is a dust storm in progress.





Here is one good example of a red saturated image, and there is NO dust storm going on.



SOURCE


Here is the adjusted one. Using the same settings I did for your image of the dusty bad hair day photo.









Cheers!!!!

reply to post by prevenge



Tell them....
Photo on Earth? Perhaps you should look at the source links and clearly see these photos are not from Earth at all, like the very latest one I just put up. The source has a 1.33Mb browse version and a 135Mb TFF version. Its from a pan image.



Cheers!!!!

[edit on 12-12-2008 by RFBurns]

Laboratory visible/near-infrared multispectral observations of Mars Exploration Rover Pancam calibration target materials coated with different thicknesses of Mars spectral analog dust were acquired under variable illumination geometries using the Bloomsburg University Goniometer. The data were fit with a two-layer radiative transfer model that combines a Hapke formulation for the dust with measured values of the substrate interpolated using a He-Torrance approach. We first determined the single-scattering albedo, phase function, opposition effect width, and amplitude for the dust using the entire data set (six coating thicknesses, three substrates, four wavelengths, and phase angles 3°–117°). The dust exhibited single-scattering albedo values similar to other Mars analog soils and to Mars Pathfinder dust and a dominantly forward scattering behavior whose scattering lobe became narrower at longer wavelengths. Opacity values for each dust thickness corresponded well to those predicted from the particles sizes of the Mars analog dust. We then restricted the number of substrates, dust thicknesses, and incidence angles input to the model. The results suggest that the dust properties are best characterized when using substrates whose reflectances are brighter and darker than those of the deposited dust and data that span a wide range of dust thicknesses. The model also determined the dust photometric properties relatively well despite limitations placed on the range of incidence angles. The model presented here will help determine the photometric properties of dust deposited on the MER rovers and to track the multiple episodes of dust deposition and erosion that have occurred at both landing sites.

reply to post by RFBurns


Maybe a litle out of topic... but if you have the time... would please take a look at nasa images PIA10210 and PIA 10210 modest and PIA09084 modest...

Thanks....








Just one exemple... maybe with your color work we can be it better

Upsss... sorry

Exemples:

You can look into the night sky and see that mars is red. How did NASA do that?

What would the other scientists all around the world say about NASA coloring mars photos? NASA is not the only people looking at and studying Mars!

(Are they all perpetrating a fraud?)

Originally posted by RFBurns
reply to post by prevenge

 

Tell them....
Photo on Earth? Perhaps you should look at the source links and clearly see these photos are not from Earth at all, like the very latest one I just put up. The source has a 1.33Mb browse version and a 135Mb TFF version. Its from a pan image.

Cheers!!!!
[edit on 12-12-2008 by RFBurns]

Lol yeah, cos it is a panoramic image, that somehow proves it could not have been taken on Earth?

Seriously, NASA is full of crap and most of its budget goes to military contracts etc. Stuff like these faked images are used to justify their overbloated budget, even in a time of financial crisis.

As for those claiming telescopes have evidence of the rovers on Mars, O'Rly? The powerfullest telescopes are nearly all owned by NASA, any images they get back of Mars is not like you or I would see in a home telescope, it is a series of dots, lines and other lil things that the untrained eye would not know what the heck they were looking at (kinda like looking at the tv screen when the aerial is unplugged, for lack of a better comparative). But the trained eye can easily claim to interpret a spec of space dust as Mars if they so deemed fit to do! So what is to say, to keep the cash flowing into NASA, some scientists claim a lot of bull, just to make you feel NASA is doing something worthwhile with your cash?

Just becuase they made a probe, launched it into space and sent it in Mars general direction, is not proof they actually sent it past the moon!

Originally posted by Lastone
reply to post by RFBurns

 

Maybe a litle out of topic... but if you have the time... would please take a look at nasa images PIA10210 and PIA 10210 modest and PIA09084 modest...

Thanks....








Just one exemple... maybe with your color work we can be it better

Is this what your looking for?





Full size image HERE

This is the complete image of that cliff. There is no zoom with independant filters to create a color composite. But with the large image, you should be able to find what your looking for.

The filters used to create this composite were L2, L5 and L6, all with even color saturation..ie L2 is red 100%, L5 is green 100% and L6 is blue 100%.

The offsetting is because I had to move the L5 layer to the right to align it so that it would mesh properly with the L2 and L6 layers, hence the odd ball color on the far left.

Here is the link to the source filter layers right off the NASA Opportunity rover image website.

SOURCE


Cheers!!!!

[edit on 12-12-2008 by RFBurns]

reply to post by Saf85


Have you checked the source link and then click on the full size image link to see the entire pan image? But thats ok if you or anyone else thinks its just pictures of some area on Earth with a touch of red added. From what I understand, that ties in with us not going to the Moon..doesnt it?


Also you might go through the entire thread, in one of my posts, I provided a link to the MGS (Mars Global Surveyor) website that takes you to an image showing the Spirit Rover approaching a crater and even the tracks from the rover can be seen in the image.


Cheers!!!!

reply to post by RFBurns


The L2 filter is at 753nm. This is near infrared and is invisible to the human eye. Using this filter in place of red cannot possibly provide a "true color" image.

reply to post by RFBurns


That is a great first attempt! I sure am glad to have helped you out!

I have noticed that filters L3 and L4 are not used. I guess I'll look in other sol days around 1167.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by RFBurns

 

The L2 filter is at 753nm. This is near infrared and is invisible to the human eye. Using this filter in place of red cannot possibly provide a "true color" image.

Did I say anywhere in there this is a true color image????

And if you check the source link, you will find that there is no L4 filter for that particluar pancam image. So I used the L2 filter because it had more intensity and gave it a color assignment of red as the base layer.

Again Phage, how can you expect true color images from these rovers when they cannot produce true color images in the first place?

We are making approximations to true color, using NASA's datasets. And as I have stated time and time again, even to you, were not re-inventing the wheel. We are simply changing the worn out tire!!!




Cheers!!!!

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by RFBurns

 

That is a great first attempt! I sure am glad to have helped you out!

I have noticed that filters L3 and L4 are not used. I guess I'll look in other sol days around 1167.

Right. Just as what I was replying to Phage, that there is no L3 or L4 for that particular image. I scanned all that was there on the page. Plenty of L6 however!

And I used L2 because in its raw mode, it had more intensity, and I remember hearing that a good bright base layer gives a better image result, so I simply set it to be a red base layer.

And thank yo DA for all your help with the gimpy!! That darn tab was so buried deep in the options tree its no wonder I couldnt find it!





Cheers!!!!

reply to post by Phage

The L2 filter is at 753nm. This is near infrared and is invisible to the human eye. Using this filter in place of red cannot possibly provide a "true color" image.

I thought it was 750nm? Human eye still respond to 750nm, though it's at the end of visible spectrum.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by RFBurns

 

The L2 filter is at 753nm. This is near infrared and is invisible to the human eye. Using this filter in place of red cannot possibly provide a "true color" image.

Is this one better suited for your tastes?









Cheers!!!!

Another image processed from the raw filter datasets in Sol 002. The datasets can be found HERE and comprise of L2, L5 and L6 filters on the PanCam of the Opportunity rover. The rover took alot of pictures in this area as can be seen in the srouce link.




Full size image HERE.

Unfortunately however, two of the filter data sets, L5 and L6, were not the same size as the L2 filter. I had to upsize the L5 and L6 filter to match the size of L2, so the full size image is not as clean as I had hoped for. But we get a nice view! And since there was no L3 or L4 filter set, I used L2 as the red base layer. This just means that instead of an actual red filter from NASA's site, I had to use another one and picked the L2 again because it had a bright intensity, which helps make the image turn out better.


(...no this is not true color or accurate science or meant to be for scientific purposes!)





Cheers!!!!