What's going on in Copernicus crater?

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by arianna

 

Chamberf=6, I would like to ask you a straight question and I would like you to reply honestly. Have you carried out any real in-depth research of Mars or the moon? If you have you would know that it can be a very time consuming exercise that requires a high degree of patience and dedication.

I have done studies on the moon and its (relative) neighbor Mars. It does take patience.

Nothing, repeat nothing even suggests civilizations on the moon or (currently) Mars.

I understand that your post to me was meant to disqualify my thoughts and that is fine, since your theories and beLIEfs are fantastical to say the least.

If you take issue with my asking very basic questions, then this is not my problem, but yours.

edit on 9/1/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)

You are incorrect. There is plenty of visual object evidence to suggest that life exists on the moon and Mars. Also, I have no problem with you asking questions.

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by arianna

. It would be better if you added something constructive for a change or is that beyond your capabilities?

Pot and kettle springs to mind

See...... nothing constructive as usual.

Hmmm, its a stretch to say that I see anything out of the ordinary in the photograph besides a few oddly shaped surface rocks, but that could be anything from a secret missile silo to natural erosion. Don't be discouraged, just because the photos aren't definitive doesn't necessarily mean there is no intelligent life on the moon. Always like checking out pics of the moon though. Good Post

Originally posted by arianna
To 'bring out' the geometrical shapes which in the base image were to fuzzy to recognize.

But the way you do it changes the shapes, so you are not getting closer to the truth, you are creating a different image with such strong changes.

Originally posted by arianna

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by arianna

. It would be better if you added something constructive for a change or is that beyond your capabilities?

Pot and kettle springs to mind

See...... nothing constructive as usual.

I have added constructive comments and images MANY times to your DELUSIONAL threads

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by arianna
To 'bring out' the geometrical shapes which in the base image were to fuzzy to recognize.

But the way you do it changes the shapes, so you are not getting closer to the truth, you are creating a different image with such strong changes.

No ArMaP, a pixel is a pixel irrespective of what shade of grey or colour it is. All that changes when enhancement is applied is the value of the shade will either become lighter or darker depending on the process used. The pixels contained in an object for instance are still the same pixels even when they are lightened or darkened and the shape of the object will remain the same.

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by arianna

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by arianna

. It would be better if you added something constructive for a change or is that beyond your capabilities?

Pot and kettle springs to mind

See...... nothing constructive as usual.

I have added constructive comments and images MANY times to your DELUSIONAL threads

With respect, you have not offered anything constructive at all. You have offered absolutely nothing. If anything, you are the one that is delusional in saying there are no structures on the moon or on Mars. There is plenty of evidence from others who have posted images on the internet showing definite structures on Mars and the moon. Some of their images have been posted on ATS. Are these people delusional?

I suggest you have a good close look at the image catologues, do some research and then you will see. Anyway, your posting of derogatory comments in this thread is a total waste of bandwidth and totally unnecessary for a public forum.

Originally posted by arianna
No ArMaP, a pixel is a pixel irrespective of what shade of grey or colour it is.

Right.

All that changes when enhancement is applied is the value of the shade will either become lighter or darker depending on the process used.

Right.

The pixels contained in an object for instance are still the same pixels even when they are lightened or darkened and the shape of the object will remain the same.

Wrong.

The apparent shape of what we see in an image depends on the colours/shades that the pixels show, that's why we cannot see a 100% white object in front of an 100% white wall. When you change the colour/shade of the pixels you make some pixels look like other pixels, so a square can become a circle or anything else, depending on the changes that the surrounding pixels were subjected to.

I will post an example of what I am saying at the end of the day.

Originally posted by arianna


With respect, you have not offered anything constructive at all. You have offered absolutely nothing. If anything, you are the one that is delusional in saying there are no structures on the moon or on Mars. There is plenty of evidence from others who have posted images on the internet showing definite structures on Mars and the moon. Some of their images have been posted on ATS. Are these people delusional?

I suggest you have a good close look at the image catologues, do some research and then you will see. Anyway, your posting of derogatory comments in this thread is a total waste of bandwidth and totally unnecessary for a public forum.

Are you having a senior moment posted plenty of info and images on this thread if YOU care to check

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by arianna


With respect, you have not offered anything constructive at all. You have offered absolutely nothing. If anything, you are the one that is delusional in saying there are no structures on the moon or on Mars. There is plenty of evidence from others who have posted images on the internet showing definite structures on Mars and the moon. Some of their images have been posted on ATS. Are these people delusional?

I suggest you have a good close look at the image catologues, do some research and then you will see. Anyway, your posting of derogatory comments in this thread is a total waste of bandwidth and totally unnecessary for a public forum.

Are you having a senior moment posted plenty of info and images on this thread if YOU care to check

I would be grateful if you would answer the question I asked above which you seem to have ignored

Originally posted by arianna

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by arianna


With respect, you have not offered anything constructive at all. You have offered absolutely nothing. If anything, you are the one that is delusional in saying there are no structures on the moon or on Mars. There is plenty of evidence from others who have posted images on the internet showing definite structures on Mars and the moon. Some of their images have been posted on ATS. Are these people delusional?

I suggest you have a good close look at the image catologues, do some research and then you will see. Anyway, your posting of derogatory comments in this thread is a total waste of bandwidth and totally unnecessary for a public forum.

Are you having a senior moment posted plenty of info and images on this thread if YOU care to check

I would be grateful if you would answer the question I asked above which you seem to have ignored

Yes I will answer we have lots of delusional members your just probably one of the worst!!!

Here you have an (extreme) example of how changing pixel values may end in a useless image.

This is the original.


Now, if I apply too much "burn", I get this:


If I apply too much "dodge", I get this:


As you can see, in both images there was some loss of data, and the same time we cannot really see the rest better than we did.

Now, if you wanted to look better at the upper line, you could have use levels adjustments, resulting in this:


Or, if you were interested in the lower line, this:


There's nothing wrong in using the tools available, but you should use the best tools for the job and do it in a way that does not affect (negatively) the data you are trying to analyse.

reply to post by wmd_2008


Thank you for answering the question. Now I understand the thought processes going on inside your mind.

reply to post by ArMaP


I am grateful for the work you have put into your examples but the original text is still there in the 'burn' an 'dodge' versions but cannot be realised. I thought that maybe you were going to show an example of how a square would change into a circle if different degrees of shadow or midtone enhancement were applied. Still, what you have shown is interesting.

Originally posted by arianna
I thought that maybe you were going to show an example of how a square would change into a circle if different degrees of shadow or midtone enhancement were applied.

I forgot about that, I only remembered that I wanted to show the difference.

That's what happens when I make a post during my lunch break and post the rest when I get home at night.