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.

 

Mars Curiosity Cameras - Your Smartphone Has Far Better Resolution!!

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by r2d246
What this proves is actually how cheaply they made this hollywood prop. So they tell some tech guys to go into there warehouse somewhere and use old parts to build this thing. They didn't actually spend a dime on it. They use old cameras and old everything.

I'm impressed that you manage to both complain about how expensive it is and how they shouldn't have spent as much money in the same paragraph.

Of course, you have no evidence or knowledge whatsoever, and just want to feel that you're special because you can be more cynical than others.

Nobody wants to hear your posts, and we've already asked for this thread to focus on facts. Your ignorance doesn't = fact.




posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


The smaller the Transistors in an integrated circuit, the less resilient it is to solar, and cosmic radiation.

This has to do with Radiation Flux, which is the incident power of the radiation over a certain area, or volume.

As you decrease the size of the transistors on the chip (I think the best we have right now is around 23 nanometres) you increase the total radiation flux per transistor.

The main problem with transistors within powerful radiation fields, is that the transistors conduct the energy of the radiation, and it turns into eddy currents of voltage spikes across the input, output, and gate....

If you apply more than the transistors breakdown voltage, even momentarily... you destroy the semiconductor properties of the transistor.

This is why the best computer systems for interplanetary missions, are going to be the older, larger transistor stuff that we made years ago, because it is more resilient to these kinds of voltage spikes.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by r2d246
 




What this proves is actually how cheaply they made this hollywood prop.

If it were a scam on th public it would have been easier to tell the public that it was an 8mp camera.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ErtaiNaGia
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


The smaller the Transistors in an integrated circuit, the less resilient it is to solar, and cosmic radiation.

This has to do with Radiation Flux, which is the incident power of the radiation over a certain area, or volume.

As you decrease the size of the transistors on the chip (I think the best we have right now is around 23 nanometres) you increase the total radiation flux per transistor.

The main problem with transistors within powerful radiation fields, is that the transistors conduct the energy of the radiation, and it turns into eddy currents of voltage spikes across the input, output, and gate....

If you apply more than the transistors breakdown voltage, even momentarily... you destroy the semiconductor properties of the transistor.

This is why the best computer systems for interplanetary missions, are going to be the older, larger transistor stuff that we made years ago, because it is more resilient to these kinds of voltage spikes.


There is a lot more about radiation-hardened semiconductors, but you have the basic idea



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



Each mastcam actually has an 8GB internal buffer.

Each camera has an 8 gigabyte internal buffer that permits it to store over 5,500 raw frames. Each camera is capable of losslessly compressing the images, or applying lossy JPEG compression, in realtime during acquisition and storage, although it is more likely that images will be acquired raw and compressed just prior to downlink to Earth. The 8 gigabytes is equivalent to a full-scale mosaic of 360° × 80° imaged in 3 science color filters with >= 20% overlap between adjacent images. With minimally lossy JPEG compression (e.g., a factor of 2), a mosaic including all science filters could be acquired. This is much more than can be transmitted back to Earth under normal communication limitations. Subframing of images is only available at acquisition, not during later processing. Color thumbnail images of 150 × 150 pixels can be created simultaneously with the acquisition of full scale images, or during processing just prior to downlink.


You can read a lot about the mastcams and other scientific instruments here:
Curiosity instruments

I do recommend this site for anybody interested in Curiosity.



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Crater Victoria año 2007
Fotografía original
marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov...
Fotografía corregida
www.imgnook.com...



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Odisea2012
 


That's not "colour correction", that's changing the colours to make it look like we want.
Edit: besides that, that photo was made with the images from the near infrared, green and violet filters, so it cannot really be converted directly to an RGB image.

PS: according to the Terms & Conditions, to which you agreed, you should write only in English.
edit on 5/9/2012 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 

Lower the original photograph and make a simple adjustment of brightness and contrast



posted on Sep, 5 2012 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Odisea2012
 


Changing brightness and contrast does not change yellow into blue, for that you must change the colours.

With levels adjustments I can turn the sky into any colour I want.
(The image was resized and cropped to make it easier to upload)





I prefer this one.



All these are subjective, as I changed the colour to what I wanted to see.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   
The last picture is quite well achieved
Now look at the intensity of light (sun at the top), that darkness into the rocky hillside is impossible and could only have been placed on purpose
Look also at the far edges of the shadows and you'll see two different colored borders two shadows?? impossible
Now increases the brightness to achieve clarity in darkened area, you will see everything that appears beneath that darkness
If that were the real shadow darkness in these light conditions ... A: double color would not exist in its edge and B: the camera had not registered what's underneath, let alone had recorded details impossible as shadows of the rocks beneath the dark
Look at the picture very carefully



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by OrionHunterX
 


Its easy to complain but if you had advanced enough technical knowledge you would know that you have to draw a line betwwen quality and performance... You have to take in account the distance plus bandwith transfer capabilities which are limited at this distance... You can either crank the quality and wait with the drone stationairy like a moron for hours while its using all of its bandwith to send high quality images or manage what you have intelligently and have multitask capabilities...

Also the lenses could be coated with special protective coatings like ir/uv or other radiations out there emitted by the sun...that could potentially affect colors or the cams themselves could be specifically built to pickup specific light spectrums for specific reasons...


edit on 6-9-2012 by _R4t_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
I think with all the OBVIOUS image anomalies on mars. I am going to start google-ing "marsgate" to see what I can come up with !
edit on 6-9-2012 by thetiler because: added thought



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:13 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:26 AM
link   
recommend you to take a look at this website Which explain How to apply the color to images in B & W of Mars
There also will see some images and colored soil of Mars
areo.info...



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Before reading any of the replies, can I ask if you've ever tried to upload maybe a 5MB pic from your phone to facebook or maybe as a picture message out in the sticks? Yeah... now try sending that same pic to Mars and see how long it takes.

I'm sure 2MP is enough to see what they need to see.
edit on 6-9-2012 by fiftyfifty because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odisea2012
Now look at the intensity of light (sun at the top), that darkness into the rocky hillside is impossible and could only have been placed on purpose
It's probably the result of adjusting the lightness of the whole image instead of using the individual images. If you look at the originals you can see that the shadows were not that dark.


Look also at the far edges of the shadows and you'll see two different colored borders two shadows?? impossible
Not impossible, that's the result of making an image with three photos taken some two minutes apart from each other, as the Sun keeps on moving and so do the shadows. You can see that in the animation below, made with three images that show a shadow.




Now increases the brightness to achieve clarity in darkened area, you will see everything that appears beneath that darkness
I never use brightness and contrast changes directly, I use levels adjustments, they are much more precise and give us much more control of the changes.


If that were the real shadow darkness in these light conditions ...
A: double color would not exist in its edge and
B: the camera had not registered what's underneath, let alone had recorded details impossible as shadows of the rocks beneath the dark
I don't understand what you mean by "what's underneath", could you please explain it? Thanks in advance.


Even without understanding what you mean, I can say that the shadows look normal to me, like any other shadows that are getting some light reflected from surrounding surfaces.


Look at the picture very carefully
I have done it several times in these last years.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Odisea2012
 


I know that site, and I have been making my own colour images with the Rover's photos for some years, although I don't use that L4L5L5L5L6 scheme he uses, I only use L4L5L6, and you can even see on his site that there isn't much difference, just compare this L4L5L5L5L6 image with this L4L5L6 image.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join