reply to post by Holger Isenberg
I also pay close attention to the filename numbers, which identify the location, time of day on Mars, and other information that helps me keep the
calibration close. I dont use just one sundial setting across several datasets. I use the sundial calibrations for each of the individual datasets.
Most of them have their own sundial calibration data for that given dataset, so I always refer to the dataset's individual sundial calibrations. I
never use just one, only for its own dataset.
It wont ever be exact even if only 10 seconds elapse from the time they snap a shot of the sundial and calibrate, then tilt the pancam up and take a
picture of the landscape. But certianly it isnt going to shift that much to a point where every single image taken has the very same level of red
saturation across the entire scenery on a clear day.
I think that alot of "cooking" and "fibbing" is going on from NASA and Cornell about these figures and all this calibration stuff because really,
red is red, green is green and blue is blue. Why even bother putting green or blue filters on the camera if there wasnt anything in those wavelengths
to take a picture of on Mars? Why not just stick with the geology filters and IR filters and b/w?
Why is it that everything in these images looks more normal, more real with color than all those red saturated images do? Even the rocks look more
natural. The hills, horizon, everything.
Lets look at Vikings color images. That uses an entirely different camera system and is analog in nature, meaning it has a linear characteristic which
covers far more visible spectrum than these limited narrow bandwidth filters using CCD imagers.
Those images, when color corrected and white balanced to even make the co2 snow look white, and the white parts on the probes themselves, we end up
with a bluish sky, brown/red ground, white parts on the probes, an American flag that actually looks normal, NASA's own emblem where the blue looks
like its normal deep rich blue color with the red part, and the letters NASA are white as well. And we see the color chart squares, the white square
is actually white, the red is red, the green is green, and most important of all, the blue square is blue, not dull bluish/violet.
The Viking images are using a whole different camera system. There were no CCD imagers in 76. The best electronic pickup device of the time was the
Saticon and Plumbicon tube used in industrial and broadcast cameras. And both Viking probes used a
camera system and basically sent images line by line one at time. Analog in nature the
cameras had far more bandwidth than the cams on Spirit and Opportunity for the visiual spectrum range.
It is the Viking images that show the most plausible evidence of the colors of Mars. There really is no reason why the cameras on Spirit and
Opportunity would be so incapable of catching any of the blue or green stuff that Vikings 1 and 2 apparently did capture, even with Spirit's and
Opportunity's narrow RGB filters, they can see enough to give us more than just red.
Thanks for posting and the info!!
[edit on 21-12-2008 by RFBurns]