There is nothing even *remotely* interesting or artificial on your images, i am just looking at your over-processed images and the alleged "structures" and "faces" you are pointing out and there is NOTHING at all.

Originally posted by flexy123
There is nothing even *remotely* interesting or artificial on your images, i am just looking at your over-processed images and the alleged "structures" and "faces" you are pointing out and there is NOTHING at all.

I am sorry flexy123 but I cannot agree with you. The view is immensely interesting. Yes, the image has been processed by a careful degree of enhancement. I am sure if NASA stated all of a sudden that they had found structures and some other amazing features on the moon and produced the same image as I have posted you would not dispute their find for one minute.

Was it not Neil Armstrong who stated the following during his speech at the White House on the 20th July 1994.

"There are places to go beyond belief."

Also during his 25-year commemorative speech, he firstly referred to the moon as a 'heavenly body', then later he referred to the moon as a planet. He was speaking about the Moon, not Mars or any other planet.

Originally posted by arianna
The original image gives the impression that there are boulders and boulder trails on the surface. Unfortunately, the whole image has been covered with what appears to be a film of smudge but this obstacle can be overcome by a degree of controlled and careful image enhancement.

You are not the first person saying that, but even if there was some "film of smudge" (and there isn't any smudge that I can see), the enhancements done to the image could not remove the smudge and show the original image, because once an image is transformed in something else by any process, we can never (almost) get back to the original image.

Viewing the second image it can be seen that what appears to be 'boulders' and 'boulder trails' is nothing of the kind. I get the impression that everything that can be observed in the enhanced image is totally artificial and the whole scene has been intelligently constructed to appear from space as being something completely different.

The second image is really artificial because you changed it.
Seriously, when you remove part of the detail, things will not look natural.

Try to apply your enhancements to a photo of a person, for example, and see what happens. If you see the same type of change that you see on these Moon photos then that means that what you are seeing is just a result of the processing of the image and nothing on the image itself.

My sincere apologies for stating the distance between the LRO and the surface in miles instead of kilometers.

I can see that some members are skeptical about what I am finding in some of the images taken by the LRO. In future I shall try and find some material that validates my claims that there are structures on the surface.

Originally posted by arianna
I can see that some members are skeptical about what I am finding in some of the images taken by the LRO. In future I shall try and find some material that validates my claims that there are structures on the surface.

I'm always sceptical of everything, but I also know that we should always try to see things through other people's eyes, I have learned some things from a person that thought she could remove some kind of masking from images, although she couldn't remove the supposed masking (that's not possible).

Have you tried doing that enhancement in other photos? You should first validate the results to yourself (I don't know if you already did that), and only if you see that things are going as you expected should you present it to other people.

But that's just my opinion.