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.

 

Apollo Hardware Spotted!

page: 23
58
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


I sincerely hope that you haven't joined ATS just to post this.

As I asked before, what's the problem with PNGs converted to TIFFs?

They were all probably converted to PNG or directly to TIFF (in the other cases) from the format used also in other space missions.




posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


I sincerely hope that you haven't joined ATS just to post this.

As I asked before, what's the problem with PNGs converted to TIFFs?

They were all probably converted to PNG or directly to TIFF (in the other cases) from the format used also in other space missions.


I suggest you to ask NASA why their subcontractors have preferred double conversion (PDS - PNG - TIFF) with time delays for Apollo sites, while other images converted to TIFF straight away.

Their XMP headers leftovers created confusion among NASA enthusiasts (including those who believe in 10 years old Obama witnessed Apollo splashdowns in the middle of Pacific from Stanley's shoulders).

Re: NASA LROC approved software and standards
(let us know if you see PNG and Adobe CS there):
geo.pds.nasa.gov...
geo.pds.nasa.gov...



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


I will ask you one more time, since you haven't answered yet.

What is the problem in converting from PNG to TIFF?

I agree that it is a useless conversion, and as TIFF is not a format used by web browsers it does not allow for people to just open those images in their browsers, but I don't see what is the problem.

The PDS formated images are not affected by this, and we have to wait until February 2010 for their release, so I am happy for the moment with TIFF files.

PS: thanks for the link, but I had already read those files.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
 

I will ask you one more time, since you haven't answered yet.

What is the problem in converting from PNG to TIFF?

Please let us know which question you want to be answered:
Do NASA subcontractors have the problem of editing PNGs before conversion to TIFFs?
Do NASA outsourcing management have the problem with QA?
Do public media have the problem by presenting links to TIFs and further edited JPGs as a proof of something?
Do Barack Hussein have childhood memory problems related to Apollo program?
Do NASA enthusiasts have a problem of finding a photo of 10 years old Obama, as they believe in his waving American flag to Apollo capsules brought to Hawaii?
Do you have a personal problem while converting PNGs?



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 



(including those who believe in 10 years old Obama witnessed Apollo splashdowns in the middle of Pacific from Stanley's shoulders).


Maybe you would be taken more seriously if you removed this particular chip from your shoulder.

You seem to be asking a serious question (about arcane things that I don't understand, such as image file formats) but you toss in this canard about Stanley Kubrick (I'm assuming you are referring to the now deceased Mr. Kubrick, and not some modern bloke with a screen name 'Stanley Kubrick'???



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
Please let us know which question you want to be answered:
OK, I will answer that.


Do NASA subcontractors have the problem of editing PNGs before conversion to TIFFs?
No, I am not interested in personal, departmental or organisational problems of editing PNGs before conversion to TIFFs, because we do not know if there was any editing done. As far as I have seen we only have proof of format change.


Do NASA outsourcing management have the problem with QA?
I don't know what you mean by QA.


Do public media have the problem by presenting links to TIFs and further edited JPGs as a proof of something?
I am not interested in that, and, as I said, being converted from PNG to TIFF does not mean that the images were edited in any way. Unless I am missing something.


Do Barack Hussein have childhood memory problems related to Apollo program?
Who cares? I thought the discussion was about the images presented this month, not about someone's childhood memories.


Do NASA enthusiasts have a problem of finding a photo of 10 years old Obama, as they believe in his waving American flag to Apollo capsules brought to Hawaii?
Who cares? I thought the discussion was about the images presented this month, not about someone's childhood memories.


Do you have a personal problem while converting PNGs?
What do you mean by that? I never had any problem converting PNGs, either from TIFF, GIF, JP2000 or CUB.

Now that I have answered your questions and the question I wanted you to answer was not included in that list, could you please answer my question? It's just one.

What is the problem with a conversion from PNG to TIFF?



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

You're accusing the CURRENT science team at arizona state university of lying. I wouldn't make such an accusation so lightly without being able to back it up with evidence.


Don't forget that you are talking about the "Harvard of Date Rape" here. Doesn't take too much imagination to realize that they wouldn't be able to fake these photos in 3 decades, let alone 3 minutes.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Since you asking about "the problem with a conversion from PNG to TIFF" many times, you might have problems with conversion between some graphics formats.
So "president is making sure that math and science are cool again, and that we once again keep the goal by 2020 of having the highest college graduation rates of any country on Earth, especially in the math and science fields,” as Obama said.

[edit on 1.8.2009 by bokonon2010]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by bokonon2010
 



(including those who believe in 10 years old Obama witnessed Apollo splashdowns in the middle of Pacific from Stanley's shoulders).


Maybe you would be taken more seriously if you removed this particular chip from your shoulder.

You seem to be asking a serious question (about arcane things that I don't understand, such as image file formats) but you toss in this canard about Stanley Kubrick (I'm assuming you are referring to the now deceased Mr. Kubrick, and not some modern bloke with a screen name 'Stanley Kubrick'???


My guess that Barack Hussien was talking about another Stanley [Dunham] and not Kubrick.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


OK, maybe I should rephrase the question, it looks like I am having problems (again) in making myself understood by other people.

My question is:
Does the fact that those files were converted from PNG to TIFF pose any problem with the files themselves?

Or, in another way:
The fact that the TIFF files do not come directly from a IMG or CUB file but from a PNG file affects their capability of reproducing what the camera "saw"?

Or:
Does the fact that those files were PNGs before mean anything besides a file conversion?

I hope you understand my question now. What I want to know is why do you (apparently) find the conversion from PNG to TIFF so important.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) reported on the "halo" generated by the Apollo 15 lunar module engine exhaust plume that was detected in the data from Terrain Camera (TC) image, as of May 20th, 2008:
www.jaxa.jp...

Lets compare with photos taken from Apollo 15 before Moon landing from archives and recent LROC image of A-15 site as of July 17th, 2009:


So, Apollo enthusiasts have to choose options:
1. The dust have not been blown away during A-15 moon landing and that notorious japs Kaguya images are not correct (but Pokemons are for real).
2. The dust have been blown away and Japanese are correct and then in 2008-2009 season the dust somehow returned to A-15 site (but fortunately all other A-15 moon site historical sightings have been preserved).


[edit on 1.8.2009 by bokonon2010]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


OK, maybe I should rephrase the question, it looks like I am having problems (again) in making myself understood by other people.

My question is:
Does the fact that those files were converted from PNG to TIFF pose any problem with the files themselves?

Or, in another way:
The fact that the TIFF files do not come directly from a IMG or CUB file but from a PNG file affects their capability of reproducing what the camera "saw"?

Or:
Does the fact that those files were PNGs before mean anything besides a file conversion?

I hope you understand my question now. What I want to know is why do you (apparently) find the conversion from PNG to TIFF so important.


That is why
"On Jul 31, 2009 10:27 AM Stanley Kubrick wrote:

Dear NASA outsourcing management,

Please tell your Arizona subcontractors to clean up XMP headers next time as they process PNG model files to TIF format.
It raises unnecessary questions, re:
lbamda.forum24.ru...

These would not happen if I were still in charge."
www.nasa.gov...

As for your (apparently genuine) interest in graphics formats and image processing, you have to wait until 2020 as Obama said about college education.

This thread is not about education in graphics tools and I am not in a position to assist with your (apparently genuine) interest beyond the topic.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by bokonon2010
 


Greetings Bokonon,

Here are some good pictures of the alleged Apollo 15 landing site that you may find interesting:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

www.hq.nasa.gov...

www.hq.nasa.gov...



[edit on 1-8-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Exuberant1, will you please stop trying to misrepresent things? You are not appearing to be clever, and are certainly far from funny, if that is your goal. Your innuendos are tiresome, and your inconsistency annoying.

You start a thread elsewhere that, for instance, shows photos that you acknowledge are actual Lunar EVA photos, but you claim they were altered because NASA had to hide "structures" in the background (they turned out to be scratches on the photo), yet HERE you use the word "alleged" when referring to the Apollo 15 landing site. It is time to pick a personality, dude!

AS TO Apollo 15, and those photos of Hadley Rille area, the vicinity in which they landed, perhaps some more information is in order:



Rille (German for 'groove') is typically used to describe any of the long, narrow depressions in the lunar surface that resemble channels. Typically a rille can be up to several kilometers wide and hundreds of kilometers in length. However, the term has also been used loosely to describe similar structures on a number of planets in the Solar System, including Mars, Venus, and on a number of moons. All bear remarkable structural resemblance to each other.
*****

Structures

Three types of rille are found on the lunar surface:

Sinuous rilles meander in a curved path like a mature river, and are commonly thought to be the remains of collapsed lava tubes or extinct lava flows. They usually begin at an extinct volcano, then meander and sometimes split as they are followed across the surface. Vallis Schröteri in Oceanus Procellarum is the largest sinuous rille.

Arcuate rilles have a smooth curve and are found on the edges of the dark lunar maria. They are believed to form when the lava flows that created a mare cool, contract, and sink. This are found all over the moon, examples can be seen near the south-western border of Mare Tranquillitatis and on the south-eastern border of Mare Humorum.

Straight rilles follow long, linear paths and are believed to be grabens, sections of the crust that have sunk between two parallel faults. These can be readily identified when they pass through craters or mountain ranges. Vallis Alpes is by far the largest graben rille, indeed it is regarded as too large to be called a rille and is itself bisected by a straight rille; Rupes Recta in Mare Nubium is a clearer example.

Rilles which show more than one structure are termed hybrid rilles. Rima Hyginus in Sinus Medii is an example, initially formed through a fault and subsequently subject to volcanic activity.


Formation

Precise formation mechanisms of rilles have yet to be determined. It is likely that different types formed by different processes. Common features shared by lunar rilles and similar structures on other bodies suggest that common causative mechanisms operate widely in the solar system. Leading theories include lava channels, collapsed lava tubes, near-surface dike intrusion, nuee ardente (pyroclastic cloud), subsidence of lava-covered basin and crater floors, and tectonic extension.


Source



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

AS TO Apollo 15, and those photos of Hadley Rille area, the vicinity in which they landed, perhaps some more information is in order:



Indeed.

Unfortunately no evidence of the Apollo 15 landing is visible in these images of the area which were taken as the LM lifted off from the landing site...



[edit on 1-8-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
That is why
OK, I understand what happened.

Someone found out that the TIFF files showing the Apollo landing sites were converted from PNG files, no problems with that, I understood it the first time I read your post.

What I don't understand is the reason behind that post, converting a file from PNG to TIFF does not change a thing in the image, unless it is converted from a 16 bit per pixel PNG file to a 8 bits per pixel TIFF, for example.

That is why I was asking what is the problem, I don't see how a conversion from PNG to TIFF may interfere with the image.


As for your (apparently genuine) interest in graphics formats and image processing, you have to wait until 2020 as Obama said about college education.
I don't need to wait until 2020, I already know some things about graphics formats, and to learn more I just have to look for the right information. Now with this Internet thing it's even easier than it was when I was in school.


Also, being Portuguese and having finished college more than 25 years ago, I don't think Obama's decisions will have any effect on my education.


This thread is not about education in graphics tools and I am not in a position to assist with your (apparently genuine) interest beyond the topic.
That is not my interest at the moment, I just want to know why the conversion from PNG to TIFF is presented as something suspicious or wrong.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


The images you posted are AS15-87-11717, 11718 and 11719, and they all show Hadley rille and the Apollo 15 landing site. This is the landing point (X) and the locations of the different EVAs:

www.lpi.usra.edu...

You should perhaps also mention that the three images you posted links to were taken PRIOR to the landing, so people don't start looking for the LM or Lunar Rover tracks in the images...

You can find the AS15-87-11717, 11718 and 11719 her, with captions:
www.hq.nasa.gov...









[edit on 1/8/09 by ziggystar60]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ziggystar60

You should perhaps also mention that the three images you posted links to were taken PRIOR to the landing, so people don't start looking for the LM or Lunar Rover tracks in the images...


Too late, he already got it wrong.
post by Exuberant1



Unfortunately no evidence of the Apollo 15 landing is visible in these images of the area which were taken as the LM lifted off from the landing site...



[edit on 8/1/2009 by Phage]



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Unfortunately no evidence of the Apollo 15 landing is visible in these images of the area which were taken as the LM lifted off from the landing site...

I hope that is just a mistake and that you acknowledge that in a future post.



posted on Aug, 1 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by bokonon2010
The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) reported on the "halo" generated by the Apollo 15 lunar module engine exhaust plume that was detected in the data from Terrain Camera (TC) image, as of May 20th, 2008:
www.jaxa.jp...

Lets compare with photos taken from Apollo 15 before Moon landing from archives and recent LROC image of A-15 site as of July 17th, 2009:


So, Apollo enthusiasts have to choose options:
1. The dust have not been blown away during A-15 moon landing and that notorious japs Kaguya images are not correct (but Pokemons are for real).
2. The dust have been blown away and Japanese are correct and then in 2008-2009 season the dust somehow returned to A-15 site (but fortunately all other A-15 moon site historical sightings have been preserved).


[edit on 1.8.2009 by bokonon2010]


Dear Apollo enthusiasts,

Please do not deviate from the question of the dust at Apollo 15 site,
we would like to see which option do you prefer: 1. or 2.




top topics



 
58
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join