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.
Originally posted by Access Denied
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
There are many, many photos that are not available in a high resolution (tiff, best example) format on the Internet. The evidence for that is everywhere. There are also many photos that ARE available in a high resolution format. Same mission, same camera... why are some photos scanned for high res distribution and others in.jpg fomat
Because the Internet hasn’t been around all that long and the Lunar Orbiter pictures (for example) were taken 40 years ago and are in storage.
Not if we want good scans.
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
Again. Funding for this high res scanning feat should be in the hundreds of dollars. Start now and they could be done in a couple of weeks. I'll throw in a hundred bucks if I can see a complete set of LO tiffies
Originally posted by zorgon
The POINT is that people like yourself come in and claim that the images are all available, none are hidden...
Originally posted by zorgon
Since the skeptics in this thread have repeatedly harped on the 'fuzzy quality' of the images and that no one could make any conclusions based on what the images show, please explain to me of what use they would be to scientists and just point me to a legitimate Science program that uses these images...
Thanks
Originally posted by zorgon
Been there done that still doing it.. still don't have the ones I want... perhaps you have a better source and would like to share it with us?
Originally posted by zorgon
However before you start on your copyright crusade you might want to do your homework. I have no need to ask permission from that site for anything... as all the high res images posted there are links to Nasa official images... even says so on the site in question...
"Many photographs on this website are courtesy of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, specifically the NASA History Office, Kennedy Space Center and Johnson Space Center, "
All scans by Kipp Teague except where noted.
Originally posted by zorgon
You got 'irate' because I 'exposed' your website and thus your true identity with your posted resume (showing the accomplishments of the guy you worked for )
Originally posted by Access Denied
I suppose if you want to be a jerk and not credit the guy who did the work that’s your prerogative. Just because NASA is hosting the images he scanned on their site doesn’t excuse you from exercising professional courtesy.
I ask you again since you conveniently avoided the question, do the members of ATS get a % of your profits for helping you find “anomalies”?
Clearly you’re not somebody to be trusted if you have no problems with exposing the identity of members of ATS.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
AD...please don't drag this all out (again).
Originally posted by they see ALL
i hope, soon, you can truly show the nonbelievers (i am on the fence, i think) the truth...
Originally posted by zorgon
In the meantime to get back to Moon Anomalies and away from all the noise... I think it appropriate to run this one one more time as I am still waiting some comments on it
and if you look on the original high res image you will see its not a spec of dust... there is too much shading and detail
I do not know if this image was one of the ordered TIFFs, but you can compare the bigger TIFF with the smaller GIF.
Originally posted by Access Denied
Originally posted by zorgon
Several people have already ordered copies in tiff from JPL, only to find the file sent is merely an enlargement of the jpg
Prove it. How do you know it’s an “enlarged” copy of the JPG? Has it occurred to you that the JPEG could be a “reduced” version of the TIFF?
Originally posted by ArMaP
I do not know if this image was one of the ordered TIFFs, but you can compare the bigger TIFF with the smaller GIF.
Looking to these two images what you think happened, the larger, blurrier TIFF (not visible inside the browser unless you use a suitable plug-in) was the original used to make the smaller, shaper GIF or was it the other way?
Or maybe both images were made from a third, unknown image.
Introduction: The Lunar Orbiter program of the mid-1960’s successfully put five spacecraft into close orbits about the Moon. The thousands of photographs returned were used in support of future manned lunar landings (i.e., the Apollo program), and served as the basis of much scientific research. For more than three decades, lunar scientists have found great use in the generally high spatial resolution prints resulting from these missions [1, 2]. Over the past five years, the USGS Astrogeology Team has endeavored to bring a subset of these photographs, in a digital format, to the desktop of scientist and amateur alike through the Lunar Orbiter Digitization Project.
Project History: Upon completion of a pilot project during 2001 and 2002 [3], we started in earnest on the systematic undertaking of generating a Lunar Orbiter (LO) global mosaic of the Moon [4, 5]. This involved scanning over 30,000 LO filmstrips at 25-micron resolution, predominantly from LO-IV, and a small number from missions III and V for farside coverage. The scanning effort alone took nearly two years to complete. Once scanned and reviewed for quality, filmstrips were reassembled into the final photographic frame as viewed by the LO spacecraft. Nearly 200 reconstructed frames resulted from this effort. Ground resolutions range from 60 to 120 m for high-resolution (HR) frames (captured through the 610-mm lens) and 500 to 1000 m for the medium-resolution (MR) frames (captured with the 80-mm lens). The result of this initial effort will be a moderate resolution, near-global, cartographically controlled digital mosaic of the Moon. In late 2003 and early 2004, as scanning for the global effort scaled back (with frame construction well in progress), another phase of the LO digitization effort began [6]. At low altitude, LO-III and -V collected hundreds of very high-resolution (VHR) frames of the lunar nearside equatorial region. Ground resolution of these data range from 1 to 5 meters for the HR frames and 10 to 40 m for the MR frames. Concurrent with the global venture, the VHR project [7] processed and delivered a portion of this very detailed imagery to the science community. To date, 166 frames (approximately 20% of the available data) have been scanned and assembled.
[snip]
Data Processing: A majority of the work during 2006 focused on refining the camera models for LOIII, -IV and -V, and geometrically controlling the global and VHR frames. We briefly discuss these advancements below, but defer detailed analyses to future documentation through a USGS Open File Report.
HR Camera Distortion Modeling. Unlike the MR camera, LO mission documentation [8, 9] does not describe a distortion model for the HR cameras. A camera distortion effect in the LO-IV data was revealed during photogrammetric processing [10], encouraging development of a model to correct the behavior. We modeled the optical distortion of LO-III, -IV and -V high-resolution cameras by measuring tiepoints between HR and simultaneously acquired MR frames. Feature coordinates in the MR frames were corrected for the known geometric distortion [8, 9]. In addition to determining (for the first time) the true focal length of each HR camera and measuring a radial distortion pattern, we found evidence of a “keystone” distortion in each camera. This results from a slight (
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
This one below (on the right) shows a complex that is quite similar to the ones Jack points out, does it not?
Originally posted by Access Denied
Scientists are funny that way… they like to get things as accurate a possible... and that takes time.
Originally posted by whatsthatthingy
Maybe I'm just missing something here. The original data/pictures were sent as raw format. These were recorded and transmitted in electronic form, right? Why on Earth would they "scan" the original pictures when they surely still have the raw data to get one of their super computers to just process them and put them out in a tiff format?
I somehow doubt anything interesting will come out from Japan, sadly enough...
Also amazing looking for Smart1 that there is only about 50 low res pics available, like Zorgon mentioned. I somehow doubt anything interesting will come out from Japan, sadly enough...
Originally posted by sherpa
Somewhere I believe in this thread I had recorded the dialogue I had with the ESA requesting Hi-Res images from Smart-1.