MARS : Unmasking the coverup [ What Mars Really Looks Like ]

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by Equiinox

 

Here is a guy who is showing us the true color of the Mars using a reversal technique This is a fight against photo manipulation and lies

Here is a guy who is altering the colour balance on pictures and getting different colours on the picture ... that isn't a reversal technique its just altering the colour balance to his taste , I used to do it with Spirit rover pictures for fun .

you already know NASA manipulates the colour Gortex.
i think thats a given

credit to missSmartypants from this thread www.abovetopsecret.com...

check the colour of the US flag


credit to Gortex from the same thread (page 2)

check the sundial


so yes, NASA is giving us false colours
but for what reason?
i dont know

maybe missSmartypants nailed it with this

As someone who has spent many a happy hour pouring over the Spirit and Opportunity photos I am pretty sure the images we are getting are not true color. As you probably know the rovers have a color wheel on them so NASA can set the colors right and in the photos where the color wheel is visible the colors are never adjusted correctly. There is also the blue NASA emblem as well as an American flag on the rovers which show up in the pictures with the colors wrong....so somebody doesn't want us to see the real colors of Mars and I suspect its maybe because we would find some green here and there that they'd rather not acknoledge right now.

reply to post by GezinhoKiko

you already know NASA manipulates the colour Gortex.

Of that I am in no doubt , as shown in your post above
Having said that I think the Curiosity pictures have been a revaluation and may show that practice has stopped ...at least for this mission

A case in point , from the Curiosity website .

Stunning picture

reply to post by gortex


can you look into this picture for me more Gortex
its Curiosity with a US flag on it
now the flags colours seem to be right
but the surface of Mars in the pic seems a very deep red/auburn
i think im just confusing myself here

so some clarificationn one way or the other would be nice

heres the pic

Actually Mars is not Red like they show it to be, its more brownish(not like earth), but it isn't red like the camera filters show us.

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
reply to post by gortex

 

but the surface of Mars in the pic seems a very deep red/auburn
i think im just confusing myself here

Hiya Gezinho.

The rover has more than one camera. This one was taken with Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI), can read about it here.

A lot of the ones with 'unique' or wrong shades etcs ... where taken with other cameras using filters.

Somewhere in between all that there is a closeish idea of what Mars sky and soil looks like I guess. Can imagine that calibrating a camera on Mars is a bit harder than using a sony cybershot though ha.

I suspect sometimes NASA leaves images a bit more red for marketing purposes, and thus tax payer support maybe. I'm not sure about any other sinister motives. I did hear one theory that it was to hide the Martian atmosphere. /shrug

Originally posted by EvanB
Looking at mars even with the naked eye it appears red.. So I call bs on the vid and its maker is just seeing what he wants to see..

So should the ground on earth be blue based on this theory? Or how about the moon, should it be white?

reply to post by Pinke


thank you pinke for clearing some of it up for me
i know it wont be as easy as using a sony finepix or any other brand available
but surely they can match the colours on the rover (ie the flag, nasa badge, jpl logo) to visually be what the colours are on earth
which in turn reveals Mars' true colour.......yes??? or no???

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
reply to post by Pinke

 

but surely they can match the colours on the rover (ie the flag, nasa badge, jpl logo) to visually be what the colours are on earth which in turn reveals Mars' true colour.......yes??? or no???

Isn't that simple sadly. I know NASA have released some images that they say are very close to the correct shades, buuuuuuut ....

Even in mega controlled environments with professionals, people still make mistakes, or factors influence things so colorists are still needed in movies for example.

The rover had I think (from memory) nine cameras or some such on it. All of them were for different purposes. Some were even just black and white. Calibrating two cameras of even slightly different hardware (and purposes) to show the exact same shades is actually pretty hard - all kinds of things can change a shade here and there. Over long periods of time with shifting sky cover, too ... you can actually take two shots within 10 minutes of each other and end up with a different result on annoying days.

The hand lens imager was used to get close ups of soil, and could also be used to look at the rover. It was focused to infiinity to allow land scape pictures, too.

The mast cams had a wheel with filters on it, and could pick up near infrared etc ... for various purposes. You can read about it a bit here. The two mast cams were also set to different focal lengths. They also had ND filter or neutral density filters. You can look up comparisons of shots and without neutral density filters on googles. Basic example here.

I suppose the end conclusion is that a lot of pictures were taken for a lot of different purposes, and a lot of them (especially those using various filters) were to gauge things like minerals, look at the sun, or investigate soil samples. There are also a lot of other factors such as dust and weather so its not always just a case of knowing exact shades.

The explanations and documents have been available ... but I guess NASA prefers to leave more fluffy easy to understand writings on their main web page.

It's one of my sources of frustration when dealing with NASA sometimes! Surely they know that persons just look at the photo and don't exactly do piles of research. A little note saying, 'we are doing X or Y in this photo' would be nice! I know the information is out there, but it can be a pain to dig up sometimes.

They've always been a little bit like that though!

Edit: It won't be today but if I stumble on the NASA piccies that are meant to be close I'll maybe U2U link but they shouldn't be mega hard to find. Persons obviously have differing opinions though.

Its seeing beyond 3D, IMO. This is something akin to his video on the moon, and you can notice that here as well, there is far more to the world than meets the eye, frequencies and densities that go higher, light as a feather Love or lower, denser harm. So in a sense he's depicting the lower astrals, gravity, stone like, and negative side of things. And yes you can see them. Some notice it right away.

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by GezinhoKiko

 

you already know NASA manipulates the colour Gortex.

Of that I am in no doubt , as shown in your post above

Having said that I think the Curiosity pictures have been a revaluation and may show that practice has stopped ...at least for this mission

A case in point , from the Curiosity website .

Stunning picture

I'm inclined to go with that, Curiosity pictures are so much better. Sadly, NASA or whoever was contracted to work on the Curiosity self portrait, made a mess of it, while NASA compounded it by saying yes, we washed out the camera arm, (the missing arm was the most remarked thing by people writing into NASA) by filling in other parts of the scene from the picture to make a cogent panoramic picture. While what they didn't say is that there are those pieces of information, (rocks missing or displaced) at ground level, also in the same self portrait, which makes the whole thing pretty moot for avid people zooming in and looking at the detail, for whatever reason. They do this over and over again without a caveat if needed for each picture. All they needed to do from the outset is to say, go to the NASA website to view all the individual pictures shown in the self portrait as the portrait may contain errors, or in the case of filtered pictures, this picture has been filtered for purpose blah blah. Instead they take the piss.

reply to post by xXxinfidelxXx


Probably for the same reason that if you were on Mars and looked at Earth it would appear as if the entire planet is blue.

reply to post by GezinhoKiko

but surely they can match the colours on the rover (ie the flag, nasa badge, jpl logo) to visually be what the colours are on earth
which in turn reveals Mars' true colour.......yes??? or no???

No. They could do that to a certain extent. But why would you want to see what the colors look like on Earth. We know what the colors look like on Earth. The thing is, the atmosphere is different on mars so colors appear different.

What does your hand look like if you put a red light in your desk lamp? A blue light? A green light? Mars has a different sky from that of Earth so the sunlight striking the surface is different from the sunlight striking the surface on Mars. As pointed out earlier in this thread, the atmosphere of Mars is heavily laden with very fine dust. This dust affects the color of the light on the surface.

The cameras have what are called Bayer filters. These are the same sort of filters that are used on consumer cameras. The cameras show what Mars looks like...on Mars.

reply to post by Phage


thanks phage
you couldnt of explained it any better
its obvious realy
now im cursing myself for asking such dumb a$s questions

i will try and make this question more worthy without missing the obvious answers........does the dust in the atmosphere range in thickness?
if yes, then its safe to say we will always have a different shade of red, auburn, copper etc in the mars pictures due to the thickness of dust which in turn will allow less/more light thru..........if no, would you mind explaining to me the reason why there is variations in shades of red

yes i could google it but i would rather here it from you

too all readers in advance, no i dont worship phage, i just appreciate his vast knowledge and clear cut answers/explanations

reply to post by GezinhoKiko


If you don't know the answer to a question, it's not dumb.

My question is this: What's the point of a "coverup"? What does NASA, in all their nefarious glory, have to gain from this? I'm at a loss to answer it my own self... So?

reply to post by seagull


i honestly dont know
i liked the idea of the colour being manipulated so we couldnt see all the greenery.
but thats been blown out of the water!

im just going to wait for what curiosity finds

reply to post by jaijlee


Woww. I'm on my phone and it took me like 5 minutes to log in and get back to your post just to say........
Lol. I'm on right there with ya on that one.

Maybe Mar's exhibits a similar phenomena to the Moon, in which the iron content reflects Sunlight to give it such a deep red glow...

Besides; yellow isn't really yellow..

Originally posted by GezinhoKiko
reply to post by seagull

 

i honestly dont know
i liked the idea of the colour being manipulated so we couldnt see all the greenery.
but thats been blown out of the water!

im just going to wait for what curiosity finds

This is one of those areas that seemed legit starting out that has, over the years, become anything but.

With the number of nations that have their own space programs, we come to one inescapable problem... Either these other countries are lying about their space programs, or NASA has them all under their control when it comes to anomolies.

reply to post by Equiinox


this video is a compilation of nonsense - the way the author goes, it's all everywhere you look around everything is some animal, bsae, building, when in fact these are shapes, rocks, craters, formations of things that only LOOK like animals or bases. I am all for the existing secrecy but this is just getting ridiculous claims!

Originally posted by seagull
reply to post by GezinhoKiko

 

If you don't know the answer to a question, it's not dumb.

My question is this: What's the point of a "coverup"? What does NASA, in all their nefarious glory, have to gain from this? I'm at a loss to answer it my own self... So?

The gain is that NASA do what they do, specific people from NASA are aware of the more secret stuff, so many NASA employees, not all have to be into the know of such things, right? In fact, very few