Squares on Mars pictures

reply to post by spikey


Exactly my thoughts - probably not as even as it looks if you got close up, but still awesome even if its possible that geology can be like that naturally.

how do the DTM's explain why they arent all over the image , surely they should be all over the entire image if they are all pieced together like that!

For instance how come there arent any of the DTM's on the craters and overlapping into the crater to determine elevation ?

Originally posted by Hellas
I found another one. This one has triangular shapes. How can post processing do this?

Here a crop

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/29ec43ca0100.png[/atsimg]

Source file:

[img]http://hirise-pds.lpl.arizona.edu/PDS/EXTRAS/DTM/PSP/ORB_003500_003599/PSP_003542_2035_PSP_005599_2035/DTEEC_003542_2035_005599_2035_U01.sb.jpg[/ img]

Probably has something to do with what's called Triangular Irregular Networks, and limitations to the kind of data input's it can process - This is a TIN:TIN

reply to post by harrytuttle


It checked your link and it shows the images are a tad skewed. But they don't show actual triangles.

reply to post by Zeta Reticuli


We don't know the real answer. We just know what they tell us and show us is right.

That's why I like to see it from another perspective and who knows...

reply to post by Icerider

That "straight" edge is not so straight when seen at higher resolution.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/89390f83c85b.png[/atsimg]
No straighter than many cliff faces on Earth.


[edit on 2/3/2010 by Phage]

reply to post by Phage


Yeah, pointed out as much in my earlier post, but it still looks odd compared to the surrounding geography, makes me wonder what process can create something like that,

[edit on 3-2-2010 by Icerider]

Hi
Good thread S&F

I think you all better look at columbus Crater/Mars on google earth, don't know if this is significant, it looks like some really bad copy and pasting? take a look for yourselves

Originally posted by serbsta
At first I couldn't see what you were referring to, but then I saw it. I just cropped out 1 area of interest from each image below...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/b77049df1839.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2e9af60d1c72.png[/atsimg]

I've never seen that before. Is it a large image composed of smaller ones? Could the composition process result in these?

If this hasn't been tampered with then it certainly isn't natural...

I did as much research as I can on the imaging and I will post it on here along with the HiRise sight with tons of color pics. But looking at the squares it can be seen as part of some imaging process, I have to admit that it looks like it's part of the processing of the picture at high altitudes, where much detail can't be seen. The big issue is that on this particular image you see swaths of squares but on the rest you don't see any. I'm at a loss but here's the links.


hirise-pds.lpl.arizona.edu...
hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...
hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

In the higher resolution pics, is that water in the bowl of the craters? It looks like water as it would look with high winds.

Originally posted by gnosis111


In the higher resolution pics, is that water in the bowl of the craters? It looks like water as it would look with high winds.

No those are just sand waves.

looks to me like this is a 3d model of the surface, which would explain why the lines follow the contour of the surface, and the blocks look similar to textures in video games. or its a farm or surface mine

These are not photographs. These are derived computer terrain maps that are not composite images at all, but computer derived computations based on stereoscopic parallax lenses, each with multiple digital ccd's and filters. Its ccd's would also see outside our visual range for example Infrared and UV wavelengths.

Stereoscopes, in reflex lenses, have to have the axis corrected either through cross-sighting (example Binoculars) or through computation such as your eyes being corrected by your brain.

The software that composed these hi rez maps would have to mark reference points to correct and compose multiple ccd composites over multiple planes into a single plane then remove the reference marks from the final map image. They certainly are intriguing but I would argue that they are remnants of the computer process used to make them.

Yes they are fake patterns.I have seen theses type of fake images on other photos.I think the problem happens when the original photos are taken or in the processing of the photos.Many google earth images show alot of these fake images especilly over water or lakes.If they were real images NASA would have hidden theses images.Sometimes NASA places fake images in photos to lead people off into a different location.

If these are indeed a digital artifact instead of an 'actual' artifact, then why are these not seen all over the craters?

Because its a computer algorithm that is piecing together several data sources. This is very common in even low resolution algorithmic computer imaging.

Even simple image rendering can take massive computing power, not to mention a lot of algorithm and code fine tuning. The math behind image rendering engines gets more complex every day but they are still limited by the quality of source files, the programmer(s) skill level, and the raw power of the processor. ( have you seen avatar's image processing setup?)

For instance even a resisizng a small wallet size photo into something 2x larger requires heavy duty fractal geometry based algorithms to retain quality.

As you can imagine things go wrong and there are a lot of residual effects.

Many errors have geometric shapes because the algorithms are based on geometry and fractals, for instance the iterated function system( bicubic, triangular, spiral, etc) is a way to construct fractal bases image resizing to retain quality.

[edit on 4-2-2010 by wtfhuh]

its obviously a case of the regular photoshop guy at nasa goes on vacation, and the temp is not as skilled at removing evidence of civilization on mars.

reply to post by Hellas


Hmmm, Good aim.
Practice makes perfect.

Fooouuurrrr!!!!
It may be early though it's never to late.

Do they have any older "film" photographs of this area that could be used to compare. Have we ever had telescopes that could see the features the ways we do in these photos? It's a bummer that the only thing we can check these photos against is more of the same.

It's easy to be an authority on something, when you're the only one with the power to look, edit, compress, and then redistribute as desired. Every one here gets the later, so really what are we going to "uncover"?

You'd be much better served getting on a telescope, if one exists that you are permitted to look through, so that, you could visually verify these things, till then, you are not the one with the power to look, edit, compress and then redistribute as desired.

All that's being "uncovered" is a reason to confuse you more. That's my opinion, but I can't blame you for trying. You've got some keen eyes. It's just to bad those eyes can't see these things for themselves.

(straight) from the horse's mouth
Fig. from an authoritative or dependable source. (See also .) I know it's true! I heard it straight from the horse's mouth! This comes straight from the horse's mouth, so it has to be believed.

Peace

I'm guessing that the squares are the result of one of two possibilities:

Possibility #1:
The squares are the result of the multitude of photos taken and then later fitted together (as in a functionality issue with the imaging programs and/or printers used to fabricate the pictures.)

OR

Possibility #2:
Due to the drastic and noticible difference in the texturing between the squares and non-squared areas, someone painstakingly went through the process of airbrushing (or digitally altering) something, or somethings, out of the photographs.

Given the history of NASA allegedly engaging in the latter of those two choices, it's absolutely a possibility.