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.

 

evidence of NASA photo retouching

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   
ok...here are some examples of very obvious manipulation of nasa images..its pretty obvious the sky has been erased for some reason..maybe its an innocent reason..maybe not..can anyone help here..why would nasa erase the area above the horizon?

ok..here is an example of the horizon..theres a dark area directly adjacent to the horizon..clear evidence of some editing.



here is another very blurry..very obviously 'painted' area..you can also see the join between the two sections of the image has been erased along with whatever was above the horizon:



2 more examples of the joins being erased along with whatever was above the horizon:




is there an innocent reason why nasa would erase the sky or why the joins are not shown in the sky area?


it seems the images dont fit here properly as the right side is missing from all 3..but you can see most of what im talking about..




[edit on 28-8-2008 by alienesque]

[edit on 28-8-2008 by alienesque]




posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Check out this video..

www.youtube.com...

I did some research on the true color of Mars and I really doubt the planet is red. Go to the website he posted in the beginning of the video and read the article on the right hand side about true color. Then go to the left side of the screen and check out some of the pictures. Compare the color value with what they said the true color value was on the home page. You can see the difference in the color between the true color pics and the false colored ones. What I don't understand is why they would fully explain the true color value and then go and post pics that don't have true color.. Can anyone clear that up for me?



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by KaginD
I did some research on the true color of Mars and I really doubt the planet is red.


Guess all those amateur astronomers are lying too. Actually it is more of a rust color. I can personally vouch for it being this color though:
farm2.static.flickr.com...



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque
is there an innocent reason why nasa would erase the sky or why the joins are not shown in the sky area?

Well it's just a bad idea to refer to a stitched panorama as a primary image source. Some automatic stitching programs try to blend images together and it can result in artifacts that only appear at certain places along the seams. Could you tell use where you got these images and what they're of exactly so we can find the originals?

*nevermind, found them myself. Here's some original images sans seams and without any alterations that would affect the sky:
marsrovers.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.nasa.gov...

[edit on 28-8-2008 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:11 AM
link   
I never said it WAS NOT red.. I said I did some research, and I DOUBT it is red.. No one is saying its a fact that Mars is not red.. Is there any room for doubt anymore???? An opinion is not a fact.. Lets keep that in mind



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by alienesque
 


There seems to manipulation of colors of Mars and there is alot of information on the net to support this. However the examples you show are just examples of overlaying images to give a wider field of view, nothing more. People do this all the time with digital photography.

The cameras on the rover only give a restricted field of view, but by taking many pictures across the horizon these can be combined to give a better picture.

Check out a example of raw images here

A example of photos overlayed with obvious gaps where images haven't been taken
marsrovers.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by alienesque
 


You get this same effect if you go to google maps and do the satelite view. It is just what happens when you try to join smaller images in order to make a larger image.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:23 AM
link   
starred, flagged...waiting for internos...



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by KaginD
I never said it WAS NOT red.. I said I did some research, and I DOUBT it is red.. No one is saying its a fact that Mars is not red.. Is there any room for doubt anymore???? An opinion is not a fact.. Lets keep that in mind

You said you "really doubt" it's red. Sounded like a strong opinion to me, I never said it was a fact. I said I can personally vouch for Mars' color, as can anyone who's looked at it through a telescope. Is your opinion that a coverup is underway and amateurs as well as professionals are in on it?



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   
I don't think anyone can deny that the surface of Mars appears red, however I believe that some images released are not representations of true color and there is evidence of this.

Check out this site, using raw images he has produced better images than NASA using the same techniques.

areo.info...

I tried it our myself here
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Finally a diagram that shows one reason to think this



Research it and you will be a bit surprised, I know I was.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by alienesque
is there an innocent reason why nasa would erase the sky or why the joins are not shown in the sky area?

Well it's just a bad idea to refer to a stitched panorama as a primary image source. Some automatic stitching programs try to blend images together and it can result in artifacts that only appear at certain places along the seams. Could you tell use where you got these images and what they're of exactly so we can find the originals?

*nevermind, found them myself. Here's some original images sans seams and without any alterations that would affect the sky:
marsrovers.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.nasa.gov...

[edit on 28-8-2008 by ngchunter]


thanks..they are black and white..and..not as large as the images i took my examples from..



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by bloodsearch
reply to post by alienesque
 


There seems to manipulation of colors of Mars and there is alot of information on the net to support this. However the examples you show are just examples of overlaying images to give a wider field of view, nothing more. People do this all the time with digital photography.

The cameras on the rover only give a restricted field of view, but by taking many pictures across the horizon these can be combined to give a better picture.

Check out a example of raw images here

A example of photos overlayed with obvious gaps where images haven't been taken
marsrovers.nasa.gov...




hello..yes..i understand that..but why are these joins not visible in the sky area?..thats my point..they fade out EXACTLY in the area that looks like it has been painted over...

it looks just like it would if the various sections were all stitched together..and THEN the sky area...ALL the sky area...was painted over...and in doing so deleting the joins in that area along with whatever was above the horizon.

again..im not saying the joins are anything odd...im saying the fact that they are not visible above the horizon is odd..



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by ngchunter
 


In the image of Mars that you posted, the planet does indeed appear to be red. But this is an image from Malin Space Science Systems, and here the planet looks like this:





www.msss.com...



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Here's more raw images from this panorama. Note that the raw images lack the stitching errors that resulted in the slightly "fuzzy" horizon.
marsrovers.nasa.gov...
marsrovers.nasa.gov...
The entire collection of the panorama images are available on sols 1477 to 1599
marsrovers.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque

thanks..they are black and white..and..not as large as the images i took my examples from..

Because the image you took your examples from is a huge panorama stitch of all of these images taken over a 122 day period. If you want you can go to the link I gave above and combine color filtered images into RGB images.



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ziggystar60
reply to post by ngchunter
 


In the image of Mars that you posted, the planet does indeed appear to be red. But this is an image from Malin Space Science Systems, and here the planet looks like this:
www.msss.com...

That's a false color image. Mine is taken in true color.
From your link:


During a nominal operational week, a total of about 273 MARCI images, taken in three of the camera’s seven color filter bands (420, 550, and 600 nanometer wavelengths), are map projected and mosaiced together to produce seven false-color daily global maps.


[edit on 28-8-2008 by ngchunter]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque

Originally posted by bloodsearch
reply to post by alienesque
 


There seems to manipulation of colors of Mars and there is alot of information on the net to support this. However the examples you show are just examples of overlaying images to give a wider field of view, nothing more. People do this all the time with digital photography.

The cameras on the rover only give a restricted field of view, but by taking many pictures across the horizon these can be combined to give a better picture.

Check out a example of raw images here

A example of photos overlayed with obvious gaps where images haven't been taken
marsrovers.nasa.gov...




hello..yes..i understand that..but why are these joins not visible in the sky area?..thats my point..they fade out EXACTLY in the area that looks like it has been painted over...

it looks just like it would if the various sections were all stitched together..and THEN the sky area...ALL the sky area...was painted over...and in doing so deleting the joins in that area along with whatever was above the horizon.

again..im not saying the joins are anything odd...im saying the fact that they are not visible above the horizon is odd..


I see where your coming from, it is quite interesting that these artifacts in the processing appear only in a small area of the seem. Its possible that its just that frame has not been processed to the same standard. Have you got a link to the original, it would interesting if the pictures you've posted are single exposures and unprocessed in respects to stiching.

Sorry exclude question as I did not get chance to see later posts.


[edit on 28/8/2008 by bloodsearch]



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by alienesque

thanks..they are black and white..and..not as large as the images i took my examples from..

Because the image you took your examples from is a huge panorama stitch of all of these images taken over a 122 day period. If you want you can go to the link I gave above and combine color filtered images into RGB images.


yes..i know...im not saying the stitching is anything strange..i understand perfectly well what its for..



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by bloodsearch

Originally posted by alienesque

Originally posted by bloodsearch
reply to post by alienesque
 


There seems to manipulation of colors of Mars and there is alot of information on the net to support this. However the examples you show are just examples of overlaying images to give a wider field of view, nothing more. People do this all the time with digital photography.

The cameras on the rover only give a restricted field of view, but by taking many pictures across the horizon these can be combined to give a better picture.

Check out a example of raw images here

A example of photos overlayed with obvious gaps where images haven't been taken
marsrovers.nasa.gov...




hello..yes..i understand that..but why are these joins not visible in the sky area?..thats my point..they fade out EXACTLY in the area that looks like it has been painted over...

it looks just like it would if the various sections were all stitched together..and THEN the sky area...ALL the sky area...was painted over...and in doing so deleting the joins in that area along with whatever was above the horizon.

again..im not saying the joins are anything odd...im saying the fact that they are not visible above the horizon is odd..


I see where your coming from, it is quite interesting that these artifacts in the processing appear only in a small area of the seem. Its possible that its just that frame has not been processed to the same standard. Have you got a link to the original, it would interesting if the pictures you've posted are single exposures and unprocessed in respects to stiching.

Sorry exclude question as I did not get chance to see later posts.


[edit on 28/8/2008 by bloodsearch]


sure...here you go:

marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...

the sky has been erased..



posted on Aug, 28 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienesque
yes..i know...im not saying the stitching is anything strange..i understand perfectly well what its for..


Then why don't you just go look at the originals? The sky wasn't "erased" in those. My guess is that it's just an over-agressive blending job because the stitching program smeared it. Since the images were taken over a 122 day period, the skies probably didn't match at all between images, making it look disasterous without "blending."

[edit on 28-8-2008 by ngchunter]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join