Mars photo with 3 orbs - or are they just birds flying in the distance? LOL, page 3

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 24 times

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:24 PM by Zarniwoop

"Full Resolution Image" and ".jpg" don't belong together in any context other than "here is a lossy jpg version of a full resolution image."

Is there a better pic somewhere?

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:33 PM by VonDoomen

* trillions of dust particles within the picture*

"OMG LOOK AT THOSE UFO'S"

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:44 PM by heretic013

mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
and here
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
and here
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

same dots to me

edit on 14-8-2012 by heretic013 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:45 PM by Bilk22

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
"Full Resolution Image" and ".jpg" don't belong together in any context other than "here is a lossy jpg version of a full resolution image."

Is there a better pic somewhere?

Hey I just posted the link to the NASA image so no one can claim I was playing with it. It's their image. It's a jpeg. I was just wondering why those "anomalies" appear in that one frame and not others. Want to comment on what they are rather than my misuse of terminology?

If, as someone else suggested, they're bad pixels, would they not be on other images? It's the same camera.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:46 PM by tarkanx007

reply to post by VonDoomen

2.5 Billion Dollar.
900 kg rover.
AND they cant implement a more the 2mb cam.
COME on.
THEY have HD cams on board (yes more then 20mb) , they dont want u to see what they see.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:48 PM by heretic013

Originally posted by heretic013
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
and here
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
and here
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

same dots to me
edit on 14-8-2012 by heretic013 because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-8-2012 by heretic013 because: (no reason given)

theres more of it on other pics - same dots...
another NASA fail...
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

edit on 14-8-2012 by heretic013 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:49 PM by tarkanx007

reply to post by DaRAGE

THEY have HD cams on board.
THEY DONT WANT US TO PEEK

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:50 PM by Zarniwoop

reply to post by Bilk22

Don't get your panties in a bunch. I wasn't criticizing you, but rather the jpg's NASA is posting. There should be some actual hirres images somewhere, yes? That would assist in this analysis.

Edit to Add: NASA themselves are calling these jpegs "Raw Images" as evidenced in their URL.

They have the raw images somewhere, they just are not releasing them yet, I guess.

edit on 14-8-2012 by Zarniwoop because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:51 PM by Bilk22

Originally posted by heretic013
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
and here
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...
and here
mars.jpl.nasa.gov...

same dots to me
edit on 14-8-2012 by heretic013 because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-8-2012 by heretic013 because: (no reason given)

So where are you going with those?

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 01:59 PM by Bilk22

Well it's settled then. NASA sent a two and a half billion dollar camera to Mars with bad pixels.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 02:00 PM by heretic013

Originally posted by Bilk22
Well it's settled then. NASA sent a two and a half billion dollar camera to Mars with bad pixels.

exactly - check the pics - same efen dots all over lol

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 02:19 PM by VonDoomen

reply to post by tarkanx007

I was under the assumption that the HD cams werent going to be "turned on" for 2 weeks after landing. in fact they might just keep them protected until they have something decent they actually want to photograph. That HD cam is way more valuable than the NON-HD one. I dont know a lot about martian weather and what not, but If i was on the team, Id wanted those HD cameras covered and protected until there was a good use for em.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 02:29 PM by seethetruth

reply to post by Bilk22

weather balloons ,or a couple of drones

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 02:29 PM by Bilk22

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by tarkanx007

I was under the assumption that the HD cams werent going to be "turned on" for 2 weeks after landing. in fact they might just keep them protected until they have something decent they actually want to photograph. That HD cam is way more valuable than the NON-HD one. I dont know a lot about martian weather and what not, but If i was on the team, Id wanted those HD cameras covered and protected until there was a good use for em.

Since it's a "hostile environment" wouldn't they have provided some way of cleaning/clearing the lens of debris? I mean there's no one around that we know of that would have a lens cloth handy

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 02:30 PM by CirqueDeTruth

Extremely hostile space travel on equipment made on earth and people expect no depreciation?

We have no way of understanding or knowing what effects long term space travel will have on equipment and then the entry into Mar's space! I think we should be thankful it's only a few pixels and not a total loss.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 02:37 PM by Bilk22

Originally posted by CirqueDeTruth
Extremely hostile space travel on equipment made on earth and people expect no depreciation?

We have no way of understanding or knowing what effects long term space travel will have on equipment and then the entry into Mar's space! I think we should be thankful it's only a few pixels and not a total loss.

Why wouldn't they have any idea? We've been putting equipment into space for decades now. Some long term.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 03:19 PM by CirqueDeTruth

reply to post by Bilk22

Space is dangerous. Debris, radiation, extreme temperatures - anything can happen, including the malfunction of the probe itself. Then there is the unknown aspect of space, there is likely more that we don't know, than do.

I think we are always lucky with the probes we send out, but particularly fortunate when they break other planets atmosphere and are able to land and collect data. We definitely can't hope to travel it ourselves, we atrophy in zero-gravity rather quickly.

I'm not an astronomer either, so it's just my generally informed opinion.

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 03:22 PM by exponent

Originally posted by Bilk22
Well it's settled then. NASA sent a two and a half billion dollar camera to Mars with bad pixels.

Yeah it is settled. Well, other than
1. It didn't cost $2.5b
2. The camera could have been perfect at launch
3. They could easily be transient errors
4. They won't affect any science whatsoever

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 04:10 PM by jra

Originally posted by tarkanx007
AND they cant implement a more the 2mb cam.

Perhaps you and everyone else who complains about the 2mp camera should read this and learn a thing or two...

Mars rover camera project manager explains 2MP camera choice

reply posted on 14-8-2012 @ 04:33 PM by hdutton

Originally posted by Bilk22

Originally posted by hdutton
I zoomed in and looked as per your instructions.

I kind of hate to break it to you, but there are five (5) of these "spots" or "orbs" or what ever they may be.

Oh no need to hate.

So where are the other two? I have it enlarged on a 32" monitor, but can't find them. Maybe they're baby birds?