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.

 

Another moving rock from Curiosity?...well yes actually.

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 12:35 PM
link   
These are two images of the same scene side by side, but you will soon notice everything is not the same. In PIA16174 the rock in the green circle is at a distance from the rock in the red circle. In PIA16239, that same rock in the green circle is now adjacent to the red circled rock, which again is the same rock in the red circle in the first picture. It is not perspective this time, PIA16239 is not a raw image in this scenario, it's part of the 'stitch-up' by NASA for the, 'impossible Curiosity rover 'selfie' and no, there is no 'c' stage prop marking on the rock, NASA or co-op's just moved it electronically. I wish they wouldn't do this stuff, but there you go. So you could say that Curiosity's Selfie is false...at least in part, but there will be plenty of other stuff with the same anomalies, like the panoramas.
So anyway, just to let you see, and take nothing for granted as being real, even when NASA does it.







edit on 16-11-2014 by smurfy because: Text.




posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 12:39 PM
link   
sorry i dont see amy resembalance in the two pics they look like two diffrent pics with diffrent rocks.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 12:58 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy


It is not perspective this time
Yes, it is.
The camera is obviously in a different location in each image.
edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Actually I am confused by this picture.

Not sure if the rock was moved or if the picture looks edited.

Ah yes, it's perspective.
edit on 16-11-2014 by Psychonautics because: On second thought...



edit on 16-11-2014 by Psychonautics because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Psychonautics
Same rocks.
Different points of view.

edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Okay, so wait, Did NASA move the rock or no? I am confused by this as it did not seem as thought he OP was trying to say the rock was moved by some mysterious force but rather that he was saying that NASA themselve's moved the rock... Did I miss something or...?



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Psychonautics
Actually I am confused by this picture.

Not sure if the rock was moved or if the picture looks edited.

Ah yes, it's perspective.


This is the Curiosity selfie,

photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov... Zoom in to ground level on the left, you will see the 'moved' rock right behind and on part of the stony surface that the rock in front is sitting on.




This is a picture of the three rocks in question, the 'Moving ' rock' at the back is absolutely nowhwere near the front rock, and is in sand. You can call it perspective..I won't.




posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: smurfy

Okay, so wait, Did NASA move the rock or no? I am confused by this as it did not seem as thought he OP was trying to say the rock was moved by some mysterious force but rather that he was saying that NASA themselve's moved the rock... Did I miss something or...?

I t was as clear as a bell what I was saying, the picture with the rock out of place is in fact the Curiosity selfie. The correct picture is PIA16174.
It is not a hoax the rock is out of place, the point of my post was to point out that sometimes the pictures are not true in their entirety.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

The correct picture is PIA16174.

Wait, are you saying that both PIA16174 and PIA16239 are from the same source image? Because neither one is a raw image.

It's pretty clear that each used difference source images, from different view points.

edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Wind plus sand plus the rover coming by could easily equal sliding movements of the rocks.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: smurfy

The correct picture is PIA16174.

Wait, are you saying that both PIA16174 and PIA16239 are from the same source image? Because neither one is a raw image.

It's pretty clear that each used difference source images, from different view points.


I already said PIA16174 is not a raw image, but the raw image is the same except in colour and contrast,
PIA 16239 is a collage using much of PIA16174, the used picture on the left the raw picture is right as below, you can see too the little rock, (circled) sitting on the ridge in front of the 'moved' rock, it is quite seeable in both pictures, it's hard to see if at all in the 'Selfie'.

do a right hand click on the picture and copy and paste the URL for a better image.



edit on 16-11-2014 by smurfy because: Picture.

edit on 16-11-2014 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
I see what the OP is seeing and it`s not just perspective,that one rock has definitely been moved or removed.

use the tops ( peaks) of the sand dunes/berms as your base comparison point since they are they same in both pictures,they haven`t changed in width or length,now look at the rock positions in relation to the top ridges (peaks) of the dunes.pay close attention to where the top (peaks)of the dunes splits into a "Y" shape.
The rock in the green circle has definitely been moved or removed in relation to the tops of the sand dunes/berms.
edit on 16-11-2014 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus




The rock in the green circle has definitely been moved or removed in relation to the tops of the sand dunes/berms.

Only if you assume the "selfie" mosaic used the same raw images as the other.

In fact, there is quite a lot of evidence that they didn't. Why is it such a big deal? When mosaics are made, images are overlayed on other images, images are blended. There is nothing deceptive about it, it is how it is done.

edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   
To Tardacus,

That you for that, and yes the ridge is important, I just posted the raw and used copies above, and the ridge is very noticeable in both..you could say the makeup of the collage required some compressing, maybe something to do with the proximities towards the one side or another of the subject objects in the pictures, and perhaps yet another picture missing here, I'm not sure about that yet.

edit on 16-11-2014 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tardacus




The rock in the green circle has definitely been moved or removed in relation to the tops of the sand dunes/berms.


Why is it such a big deal? When mosaics are made, images are overlayed on other images, images are blended. There is nothing deceptive about it, it is how it is done.


Don't do that Phage, your are twisting my thread, I didn't say anything about deception and you know it, ("no, there is no 'c' stage prop marking on the rock" remember?) The point of the thread was to make all users aware of what they are looking at, and I have said many times I wish NASA would leave things alone and let someone else completely unattached do that stuff. If NASA want's to do that, they need to do it better, whatever it takes. In any case, you can't talk about perspectives on the one hand, then discuss the merit or otherwise of mosaics on the other, this thread is about the awareness of collages, in this case, perspective has nothing to do with it..at all.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy




I just posted the raw and used copies above,

No you didn't.
Neither PIA image is a raw image.

Each of the images are from a different perspective.
Note the alignments.


Nothing was moved. Different images were overlayed to create the "selfie" mosaic.



If NASA want's to do that, they need to do it better, whatever it takes.
NASA didn't do it. Malin did.

Produced By: Malin Space Science Systems

It is explicitly stated that it is a mosaic. and the point of the mosaic was the selfie, not the terrain.

On Sol 84 (Oct. 31, 2012), NASA's Curiosity rover used the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) to capture this set of 55 high-resolution images, which were stitched together to create this full-color self-portrait.

The mosaic shows the rover at "Rocknest," the spot in Gale Crater where the mission's first scoop sampling took place. Four scoop scars can be seen in the regolith in front of the rover.

photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

Here's another mosaic.
mars.nasa.gov...


edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: smurfy




I just posted the raw and used copies above,

No you didn't.
Neither PIA image is a raw image.


,
Yes I did, PIA16174 and it's raw image side by side, and it is used in the collage, and I also said much of it and in my reply to Tardacus, I also said there could be more images which follows on, but the raw images are all there, and no matter what, the overall perspective will not make up for the difference between the two rocks. Again I said co-ops in the opening post, so Malin did it and NASA use it in their photojournal.
As for saying nothing was moved is silly, as I use, 'moved' each time. I've no objection to there being more pictures used either, even the one I posted to Psychonautics could be one of the 55 used in the whole collage of the selfie, but it won't make a difference to an impossible end product, even if you used all 55 of them on that little rock alone. macht nichts!
edit on 16-11-2014 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy

Yes I did, PIA16174 and it's raw image side by side
PIA images are not raw images. PIA 16174 shows two different versions of the raw image. You did not post any raw images. You assume that the same image was used in each PIA. My demonstration shows that it was not.

This obsession with mosaic artifacts is ridiculous. Don't like it? Do a better job and post it on Gigapan for us. Lots of people do.
www.google.com...


edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: smurfy You did not post any raw images. You assume that the same image was used in each PIA. My demonstration shows that it was not.
PIA images are not raw images. PIA 16174 shows two different versions of the raw image. You did not post any raw images. You assume that the same image was used in each PIA. My demonstration shows that it was not.
This obsession with mosaic artifacts is ridiculous. Don't like it? Do a better job and post it on Gigapan for us. Lots of people do.
www.google.com...

Look man, I posted PIA164174 and the raw image side by side in reply earlier to you, here they are again,

photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...



I also assume nothing other than a good part of PIA16174 was used in the collage. Obsession? saying I don't like is not exactly obsession therefore
Being wrong, I do that too..not in this case.



posted on Nov, 16 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: smurfy




Look man, I posted PIA164174 and the raw image side by side in reply earlier to you, here they are again,

That collage of two images is PIA164174. Just as PIA16239 is a mosiac.
Neither one is a raw image and it is clear (even without my demonstration) that the raw image was was used in PIA164174 is not the same image which was used in PIA16239. The perspective is clearly different.


Obsession? saying I don't like is not exactly obsession therefore
Being wrong, I do that too..not in this case.
There is quite clearly an overeagerness to "bust" NASA. Mosaics are a very common way to fail at doing that. The video you found attempting to do this is but NASA another example of the obsession with mosaic artifacts.

Dear reader , as you know NASA has been sending automated robots to Mars and has sent thousands of images of this planet , we get the question: Nasa lies and retouch images that send their robots on Mars? What hidden ?

NASA did not lie.
NASA did not create the mosaic.
It is clearly stated that it is a mosaic.



edit on 11/16/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join