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.
Now let's see what India's Chandrayaan comes up with. I believe a detailed hi-res Moon atlas is under preparation and would be out by the year end.
Originally posted by RUSSO
reply to post by The Shrike
So, how blurred are your eyes? Go see a ophthalmologist and buy some glasses to see if it solves your lack of perception
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Oh! How the believers love to bash NASA! Geeez! Rocks are rocks, no matter the spin put on it!
Then why does NASA call them BLUE BERRIES?
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
The TRUE color cannot be shown with the present crop of cameras - only an approximation.
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
Oh! How the believers love to bash NASA! Geeez! Rocks are rocks, no matter the spin put on it!
Then why does NASA call them BLUE BERRIES?
They aren't actually blue! It's FALSE color. No one can get to see the exact color on Mars. The TRUE color cannot be shown with the present crop of cameras - only an approximation. Turn the L2 camera's saturation up and you'd get RED 'blue berries'!
So what's the big deal? There are no 'blueberries' on Mars like one finds on Earth!
edit on 18-11-2010 by OrionHunterX because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by backinblack
But I'd have to ask if they can't film in colour then why does the Rover have the test colour samples on it??
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
The TRUE color cannot be shown with the present crop of cameras - only an approximation.
Seems you need a lesson in primary colors of light... but I don't have the time
True Color Images from Mars Rovers
Originally posted by OrionHunterX
We all know or should know that "true" RGB wavelengths are something that cannot be nailed down to a definite value, the response is more of a curve.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
My point should have been obvious.
I mean, really IF there was "something" to cover up, I would think it would be far less obvious?? Looks amateurish. Makes no sense.
This thread's premise is, after all, about NASA "editing" ... implying some sort of "deceit".... I submit that that accusation has been overblown, for reasons that escape me.
Yet, on our (very small samples) of other worlds' photos, when there is no actual Human eye to judge, we work with what we have.
"color" is very subjective, as we all have probably experienced.
Originally posted by zorgon
It does IF the cover up is on a grand scale and they 'let' us see the obvious fudges just to keep us busy. The real stuff is covered up with algorithms created by Sandia labs... algorithms that contain codes to show the original data... algorithms that are TREASON if you even possess a copy... But then that's a whole new thread
Originally posted by ArMaP
I'm sure we will get there, eventually, but for now I think the image tampering, if exists, it's done by humans, or at least reviewed and retouched by humans.