Curiosity: Potential Anomalies (Update 01/2014)

funbox
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse

 

it was an accidental magic wand selection, parts of that section got wiped

, nothing to anomalous... I should redo really , but im feeling kinda knackered

thankfully they're not some weird kind of robot eating nano bots

funBox

you would not notice those brushstrokes on a real spoke anomoly. The imaging software is trying to disguise curio as a rock in the twilight lol.

reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse


I think the 70% compression could do that all by itself, but I edited my post back a page , I realised it wasn't my doing , and looks to me like a data loss artifact, maybe phobos got in the way

funBox

reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse


The image you linked has a uniform shaped object (like a cast metal transmission case with a "C>" a C and a right facing arrow point next to it. the C looks very clean like a typeface even at maximum zoom using a web browser as the viewer,, like a logo was imprinted on it

Definitely weird.. A few other things in the image are what looks like an eyebolt end..
I'm not really sure how to interpret those, but seeing them is more than interesting...

I need to install an image editor so I can point them out like our other astute posters are doing..

funbox
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse

 

I think the 70% compression could do that all by itself, but I edited my post back a page , I realised it wasn't my doing , and looks to me like a data loss artifact, maybe phobos got in the way

funBox

I'm not clear on what the 70 percent compression is, and how it affects the photographs. Does this mean that the objects themselves are 70 percent longer and larger in real life? Or something else? Can you post, if you have time and there actually is a difference, a comparison between what an object would look like in real life compared to one imaged by Curiosity. Does it depend on the distance from the camera? Maybe this is like the illusion in TV studios, where the room looks much larger on television than it does in person. Phobos has cooties. Thanks.

reply to post by Aleister


that will be the jpg compression . its how the file start off on the rover , at probably over ten megabytes and ends up, after some mallet work, 350 kilobytes
the reduction is in quality ,

so we get more pictures. quantity over quality is their excuse

funBox

reply to post by funbox


Alright, so the original pics have much more detail and information within them, but the quality is laughed at and given the bums rush. So....can the JPL/NASA/WonderShowzen personnel look at a picture that they want more information from and ask the rover's computers to send up another copy, this time with less competition from the other uploaded information so the quality is pristine? Enquiring minds want to know. Thanks for the knowledge download.

reply to post by Aleister


ah , I think ive asked this question a few times in the thread already , still waiting . ide imagine that they have , and they offen do , as long as there is a two way communication , potentially they could get the rover to do backflip let alone request a larger. full quality RAW

if we had one of these from the rover .. just one , we could do an interesting comparison

funBox

reply to post by funbox


I've asked for angels to dance on the head of a pin in 3D slo-mo and haven't heard back either. We need to organize a Million-Nerd March on JPL headquarters demanding, yea, ordering, them to do the things we want them to do (for at least a day). Thus sayeth the fnord.

symptomoftheuniverse
You cant deny these ruins peteandkimmybird.files.wordpress.com...

But I can doubt, some parts look reconstructed.

funbox
its feint , adjusted curves helps

funBox

Silly me, I was looking for it on the original image instead of using a resampled version.

symptomoftheuniverse
looking at curio-whats that splodgy white stuff? A glitch from image processing? Is this how they hide normal looking anomalies? A bit of scribble and blur perhaps.

Those completely white areas? Those appear on the reflexes, they are probably the result of the sensor being overloaded on those pixels.
That's why I usually say that, when people point to things on Mars and say they look metallic, a really metallic object would appear much brighter, as metal is more reflective than rocks.

Something I'd like to get a little closer look at:


From the same image. Unusually leafy looking.


mars.jpl.nasa.gov...]http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/00579/mca m/0579MR0024050000400001E01_DXXX.jpg

reply to post by Blue Shift


Good finds, as usual. I wish there was a close up of that rock too.

And behind the rock in the first image there might be one of those things funbox keeps as pets, the smooth rounded on top and wavy rimmed on bottom whatsyamacallits.

Then, from the same image, over to the right front a bit, a face stares out on the barren Martian landscape, ever waiting. We haven't had a face in awhile (awhile defined as a couple of days in these here hunting grounds):

reply to post by Aleister


an army of slugites , sounds like fun



spooky



funBox

funbox
reply to post by Aleister

 

an army of slugites , sounds like fun

spooky

funBox

Good slug. And for BlueShift's shell-like whatis, have to like it for a potential. There have been quite a few now with the same shape and they all are in white or ivory color which make them stand out from the rest of the rock.

The bottom face, from your pic it's horribly obvious from the fuller picture that it's a miniature Crouching Sphinx.

reply to post by Aleister



that's a flipper peridolia , I can see what like a cherubs face , facing left, and a laughing skull facing head on right.

reply to post by ArMaP


your blow up has been resampled , you've almost smoothed out the diagonal tracks too

funBox

reply to post by funbox


Yes, I see what you mean. It's one of those two-fers we long for in clouds and rocks. When you get the three-fers and four-fers then you're really traveling in style. I like the Sphinx arms stretching out on either side of the crouching face. Crouching biker hidden Sagan.

funbox
your blow up has been resampled , you've almost smoothed out the diagonal tracks too

No.

And here in all its roundy spokey glory is a funbox image of the kind-of-near-camera spoke I spotted on page 117. This one, which seems to be mostly exposed in the rock from our perspective, is good enough to frame and put onto the Mars Spokey creature page on Wikipedia (when it gets created). Thanks funbox, and thanks to symptomofheuniverse for linking a link to the full picture where this was sitting patiently waiting for some crazy earthlings to spot it and make a chalk rubbing.

reply to post by ArMaP


ahh .. I see whats happened , you've not got the anomaly in frame , its cropped out in your blow up , you need to move a little more to the left say around 100 pixels

funBox