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.
I always prefer the original, if available, that's why I like when people post the photos' IDs, that allows me to look for the originals instead of being limited to the photos posted.
Originally posted by Havick007
Are you saying the photos from google arent of good enough quality to make objects out? They seem pretty good to me. What does everyone else think?
Yes, raw images are good, but the radiometrically calibrated photos are better. The raw photos are automatically (I think) converted into JPGs from the original format after being received from Mars, without any processing, so they are the closest to the original.
The raw images maybe greyscale but are still pretty good.
The problem appears when people see a turkey.
You might have picture that has a rabbit and duck in it but some people only see the rabbit, it takes time to see the duck.
Originally posted by Havick007
reply to post by wmd_2008
Are you saying the photos from google arent of good enough quality to make objects out? They seem pretty good to me. What does everyone else think?
The raw images maybe greyscale but are still pretty good. I can certainly see odd things. Hey here's something to ponder, you know those pictures we have that have to different objects in one. I'm not sure of the name of them, they are similar to inkblot pics. You might have picture that has a rabbit and duck in it but some people only see the rabbit, it takes time to see the duck. You know you see them in IQ test's and stuff. You might need to take the same approach to these photo's.
There's many things i didnt see when i first skimmed over the pics. But after careful study certain things begin to stand out. Just a thought
Also as you said about pixelated images etc i know what you mean. I have seen thread where people try to pin point objects on lo res cam's in orbit. It is a waste of time i know. These arent lo res. I will post an example below.
This picture is of odd tracks near the Lcross impact zone on the moon. They are Hi res pics from Kaguya sat. With Lo res pics you couldnt make this out at all.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ea91ce2c14ff.jpg[/atsimg]
The tracks are approx 10 kms in length
[edit on 18-4-2010 by Havick007]
Originally posted by Havick007
reply to post by wmd_2008
This one is zoomed in on G/E so i will admit it is of poor quality.
Below is with some crude paint work.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c97ca8727135.jpg[/atsimg]
The object with blue outlines seems to me like a person kneeling down facing the main rock formation( yellow outline ) Also notice an image or motion blurr just near the ( yellow ) rock formation. Oddly looks like a face.
The red outline is what appears to a staff or long stick leaning against the rock next to it. Notice as well the double prong or fork at the bottom if the stick.
Originally posted by ArMaP
After looking more at the photo (the one from the left camera), I don't think it's a sensor fault, it's more than one pixel and all those faults are limited to one pixel at a time.
Here are the photos again, from the radiometrically corrected versions, with levels adjusted in Photoshop.
character 1 - Spacecraft ID
1 = Opportunity
character 2 - Camera
N = NAVCAM
characters 3 to 11 - Spacecraft clock
231438994
characters 12 to 14 - Product type
EFF = full frame EDR (Experiment Data Records)
characters 15 to 16 - Site number
82
characters 17 to 18 - Drive number
XU
characters 19 to 23 - Command sequence number (one letter, 4 numbers)
P0705
character 24 - Camera eye
R = Right
L = Left
character 25 - Camera Filter (PANCAM only, 0 otherwise)
0
character 26 - Product producer
M = MIPL (OPGS) at JPL
character 27 - Product version number
1