Uhh Houston theres a problem.

I looked at some of these photo's from other post's and you can clearly see that there is way to much red blended in. The shadows on the ground and the sunburst in the polished aluminum. Now there is all kinds of science explanations to this photo being to red, all of which is totally rediculous. Just because there is red dirt on the ground doesn't mean everything will be red! Oh yeah and don't forget about the picture compression methods is why they are so red explanation. That is total hogwash. We have been transmitting signals on radio waves for years. You can't tell me that Nasa can't snap a CLEAR REAL color digital photo and send those (1's and 0's data) back to earth to recompile it back into a image??? This sort of thing is done everday millions of times folks! So the real question is when is Nasa going to come clean and quit clowning around wasting our time and money.

heard it all before...

Originally posted by sean
I looked at some of these photo's from other post's and you can clearly see that there is way to much red blended in. The shadows on the ground and the sunburst in the polished aluminum. Now there is all kinds of science explanations to this photo being to red, all of which is totally rediculous. Just because there is red dirt on the ground doesn't mean everything will be red! Oh yeah and don't forget about the picture compression methods is why they are so red explanation. That is total hogwash. We have been transmitting signals on radio waves for years. You can't tell me that Nasa can't snap a CLEAR REAL color digital photo and send those (1's and 0's data) back to earth to recompile it back into a image??? This sort of thing is done everday millions of times folks! So the real question is when is Nasa going to come clean and quit clowning around wasting our time and money.

yea, there seems to be a problem.....with your head

if the ground is red any light reflected off it will have a reddish tinge... not everything is a cover up

The problem is, everyone expects things to look like they do in Holywood movies.

The sky is not blue on Mars. Instead, it has colors that have been described as everything from "orange-pink" to "gray-tan ... This is because the atmosphere of Mars is very thin and dusty, and atmospheric light scattering is dominated not by the molecules of gas (in the case of Mars, mostly carbon dioxide) but by suspended dust particles. These are larger than the wavelengths of visible light, and they are reddened by iron oxide, like Martian soil.

A semi-detailed explanation

people need to stop making these "NASA is changing the color of Mars" threads.

You mean Hollywood has got it all wrong?

Its a clear fake as far as fakes go...this one dude told me he knew a guy who worked for nasa and that guy said that it was faked by guys who knew the president of enron..now im not lyin ya hear? This happens to be the gods honest truth sdo help me god stick a needle in my eye its the trith i do

The color dials on the rover are wack but this one on viking is a lot closer to what it is supposed to be...

www-rohan.sdsu.edu...

These colored squares and dots on sundials are to adjust the color to the best real colors that is exactly what their purpose is for. Once the RGB is adjusted properly you then get exact colors are supposed to be in the rest of the picture. The white looks white and the sky is a slight tint of tan to it. This is the best real picture I seen yet that is the true color of the surface of mars. Note these pictures was taken by viking in 1975-76!

It's hard to believe that Almost 30 Years later Nasa cannot adjust the color properly with better technology and all. A lot of people will say, well you can't adjust the camera to true colors because of atmosphere and dust storms. This is true, but Mars doesn't look that hostile with raging dust storms to me. If the atmosphere is tan or redish in color then they should have thought of a better way to adjust the cameras RGB away from atmospheric conditions. The way they adjust colors off a sundial on the outside out in the open is totally wack to start with. They can design a electronic device to adjust perfect RGB or stick the lens into a box like capsule to adjust the colors away from atmospheric conditions manually. As far as not being able to snap a photo close to a humans sees the color, is totaly off the chart. Digital cameras are pretty close to real life color quality. Now the questions is, why can't Nasa simply snap a digital photo? They talk about all these special filters and picture compressions and other crap they have to do. Give me a break!

Also another thing is if Nasa was trying to discover if there is life and water on Mars then why didn't they simply land the damn thing on the Ice cap?? Go figure that one out Mr Wizards! They could of melted some of the ice and analyzed it a whole lot easier than grinding a rock! I just get a kick out of seeing Nasa lab pictures of the rover under big red lights.