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.

 

Our grey moon.

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I have a question. Some of you would probably think it's a pretty dumb one to


I know all those beautiful space pictures are all brightly coloured because we add colour our selves. In reality we can't see them let alone tell what colour they all have.

We can see the colour of our surrounding planets but it's just the light it reflects what we see.

Now we have a Moon which always looks grey. I've seen one coloured picture and I read somewhere it was a hoax and someone added the colour himself.

My question.

Why do we always see a gray Moon. Even with state of the art NASA equipment it seems they saved money when they bought the cameras taking the pictures.

Why ?




posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
it is my understanding the full color moon pics are computer generated colormaps based on erm...height I believe...

so no, the moon is in the black/white scale overall...but hey, we got crayons



update
source

Seems that there may be a bit of color on the rock after all...reading through it...not sure what is and isn't true though, so take it with a grain of salt

[edit on 8-4-2010 by SaturnFX]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 01:54 PM
link   
heres something that may interest you. Moon grey?

www.youtube.com...
Theres another series too Moon Rising



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
There is color on the Moon but it is subtle.
Here's what it looks like when the subtle colors are exagerated. The colors aren't fake, they are boosted to make them more visible.

apod.nasa.gov...

The Apollo astronauts reported a range of color variation which was highly dependent on the angle of sunlight.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
I always wondered. My digital camera can take 10mp true color photos, but NASA with their previously infinite funding cannot mount a camera that can interpret the true light frequency coming into the lens.

Anyone?

I mean if you look at the color swatch on the mars rover, those colors are Way off. Wtf gives?

[edit on 8-4-2010 by DaMod]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 

You realize that your camera takes three different grayscaled images and coverts them to color, right?
electronics.howstuffworks.com...

Your camera is meant to reproduce the way things appear to our eyes.
Geologists don't really care about that. There is more to be learned about mineralogy by using wavelengths we can't see.

[edit on 4/8/2010 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
I always wondered. My digital camera can take 10mp true color photos, but NASA with their previously infinite funding cannot mount a camera that can interpret the true light frequency coming into the lens.

Anyone?

I mean if you look at the color swatch on the mars rover, those colors are Way off. Wtf gives?

[edit on 8-4-2010 by DaMod]


I always wondered about that too - the colour swatches are miles off. I've seen suggestions elsewhere that the sky is actually blue on mars and TPTB are telling big fat ones about the composition of the atmosphere. Who knows tho? Those colour swatches are definitely off in any case.

I'll try to hunt out the 'blue sky' mars photo I've got, it's from a NASA press conference - they had a bit of an 'accident' with their overhead projector and it briefly showed rover images with a blue sky.

On topic.... I always thought the moon was made of cheese, surely it's yellow?



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Thanks Phage. The Moon looks a bit rusty don't you think.
I've read about it being brown. This looks brown to me. Well most of it.
Nice picture.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jazz10
 


Cool vid
it really explains a lot.

I was actualy surprised it turned in a conspiracy



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
During at least one Apollo mission, I remember when the astronauts found some red dust, and they were scooping it up as fast as they could (as they were running low on O2)...so yes, there is some color there.



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Wow I just stared your post in a reflex

I'm not used to attention from high up.


Thanks. Did you see the video from Jazz 10 about the conspiracy of Earths colours ?
Or maybe you know a good thread on it ?



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


Acording to NASA documents the B&W films offer more resolution than color. And from what I have seen I agree!



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by theability
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


Acording to NASA documents the B&W films offer more resolution than color. And from what I have seen I agree!



I'm sorry you lost me here. B&W films ?



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


Good Morning....


Sorry I wasn't trying to be cryptic Black and White [B&W] film. I am currently looking for the document that says the older films, BW was used because of resolving ability over color films at the time.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


I'm just a member like anyone else....


No, didn't see that, but then, a lot of my access is during boring conference calls, etc., so I don't look at vids...



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
John Lear claimed that the moons atmosphere caused it to have a saffron colored sky (sodium rich atmosphere).

I would expect that the nitrogen in our atmosphere causes some scattering, and that the sodium (if it exists) in the lunar atmosphere would cause additional scattering.

I am willing to bet that the moon is, like mentioned by others, a combination of green, gray, black, white, and blue. There are areas like Aristarchus which actually emit light....this is anomolous in and of itself i believe (they call it Transient Lunar Phenomena).

John Lears theory was that the atmosphere was thicker on the far side due to some strangeness in the gravitational/inertial forces, and there was enough O2 close to the ground to support life. This matches closely with what Ingo Swann claims, with there being possible plant life just inside some of the caves on the far side.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


I know you are a member. It's just the avatar saying you're a super mod.
It makes me humble. As if I'm in school again


You should watch the video. It has a few quetions in it which are definitely conspiracy worthy.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by theability
 


Good evening


Black and white


Not one of my brightest moments.


What you say makes perfect sense actually. I would think they solved any problems by now. Still grey is what we get.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


From what the USGS says orbital photos of Apollo era film, the best resolution of film is BW 3400 film with a megapixel value of hasselblad imagery being about 25 megapixels

in the 1960's rotf...



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 

How old is Ingo? Was he a Dick Tracy fan? I know I was.




[edit on 4/9/2010 by Phage]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join