Who really made the Curiosity Self-Portrait?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:08 PM
link   
First of all I think this is one of the most amazing self-portrait I ever have seen from Curiosity.
And as always its taken on beautiful day with blue skies........

But some elements of this picture makes no sense to me and a bit curious ? , Like how could they manage to make this picture without someone else making this shot? because it looks like the photo made with a wide angle lens? and where are the tracks on the left bottom side come from? (marked with red arrow) because they look like footsteps to me?




Full size Self-Portait Curiosity

But as always around assumption out of proportional visions , curiosity kills the thread..

peace....
edit on 12-12-2012 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Isnt this image just stitched together from many images? I am pretty sure thats how it was made.

EDIT: www.nasa.gov...
edit on 12-12-2012 by homeslice because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by homeslice
 


Then they have done a great job in photoshopping, because most of time you see the outlines, in previous pictures assembled to one.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Already talked about in this thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The image was made by stitching together many different images, and then photoshopped out the robotic arm. Here are the images used to make the "self portrait"

Link to raw images for Curiosity Self Portrait



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   


The robotic arm on NASA's Mars rover Curiosity held the rover's Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) camera in more than 50 positions in one day to generate a single scene combining all the images, creating a high-resolution, full-color portrait of the rover itself.


I'm pretty sure those are scoop marks to the left, made by some type of on board instrument. Cool photo though. I wouldn't have seen it if you hadn't brought it to my attention.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
It's made from many images stitched together taken by an arm. They are not footprints, do you seriously think NASA are stupid? They're not. If they were faking things, they wouldn't let anything slip, especially not something that obvious.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Okay than MOD shut it downnnn....my bad.............
edit on 12-12-2012 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by 0bserver1
 


I am curious as to what NASA actually say with regard to the question, of who took the self portrait of the rover. I cannot help but think of a dog when I see the word rover. Are the masses who believe everything NASA tells them without question - are little more than faithful dogs???

I question the fact we the populous have been receiving blurry out of focus photographs of the moon for years. Suddenly we are given clear in focus photographs from the rover -purportedly on the surface of Mars. It could very well be photographed from a studio set or an isolated area of a desert anywhere on planet Earth.

NASA employ artists - the type who are talented and are adept with the use of air brush technology and electronic technology that would supersede anything photoshop could manufacture.

I don't believe that the rover is actually off the planet but I do believe that we have the technology and the people willing to perpetrate a story that rover is in outer space. I looked at the link you provided and the tracks don't seem to make sense and you are definitely right about the footprints. They are indentations - but of what - by whom and when????

Much Peace...

edit on 12-12-2012 by Amanda5 because: grammar



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amanda5
reply to post by 0bserver1
 


I am curious as to what NASA actually say with regard to the question, of who took the self portrait of the rover. I cannot help but think of a dog when I see the word rover. Are the masses who believe everything NASA tells them without question - are little more than faithful dogs???

I question the fact we the populous have been receiving blurry out of focus photographs of the moon for years. Suddenly we are given clear in focus photographs from the rover -purportedly on the surface of Mars. It could very well be photographed from a studio set or an isolated area of a desert anywhere on planet Earth.

NASA employ artists - the type who are talented and are adept with the use of air brush technology and electronic technology that would supersede anything photoshop could manufacture.

I don't believe that the rover is actually off the planet but I do believe that we have the technology and the people willing to perpetrate a story that rover is in outer space. I looked at the link you provided and the tracks don't seem to make sense and you are definitely right about the footprints. They are indentations - but of what - by whom and when????

Much Peace...

edit on 12-12-2012 by Amanda5 because: grammar


What in the world are you talking about? Have you been hiding since the 1970s?

Viking gave us some very clear pictures of the surface of Mars. The Voyager probes gave us very clear and stunning pictures of the outer planets and their moons, followed by Galleo and Cassini. Then we have had 3 other rovers on Mars also sending back very clear pictures of the surface of Mars prior to Curiosity.

Then there is the LRO taking pictures of the moon with 0.5 meter resolution, and the HiRise pictures sent back from Mars from that orbiter........

I question the validity of your claims.......



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint
It's made from many images stitched together taken by an arm. They are not footprints, do you seriously think NASA are stupid? They're not. If they were faking things, they wouldn't let anything slip, especially not something that obvious.


But they're GENIUS. They know that if they leave foot prints in the sand, and people notice it, that they'll be able to say "Really? You think we're that dumb?" and get away with it.

Brilliant.

It's all a lie, why I don't even believe there is a planet Mars. Prove it.




posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


I respect your opinion and you are free to question the validity of my opinion. I am free to question all the lies and delusions we have been fed for many many many generations.

Have you read Animal Farm or 1984 by chance - it will tell you that in the future any person who tells the truth will be seen as a traitor - an infidel - a person not to be trusted. Telling the truth these days is an act of treason just as the mentioned book titles predicted/foretold/warned.

NASA employ artists and have technology that would be on par and better than that which is utilised by the major film production houses. Think about it and as an exercise in natural psychology - remove the word co-incidence from your vocabulary and then review all you know - or think you know. Take your time there is an entire universe of learning to examine.

Much Peace...



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amanda5
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


I respect your opinion and you are free to question the validity of my opinion. I am free to question all the lies and delusions we have been fed for many many many generations.

Have you read Animal Farm or 1984 by chance - it will tell you that in the future any person who tells the truth will be seen as a traitor - an infidel - a person not to be trusted. Telling the truth these days is an act of treason just as the mentioned book titles predicted/foretold/warned.

NASA employ artists and have technology that would be on par and better than that which is utilised by the major film production houses. Think about it and as an exercise in natural psychology - remove the word co-incidence from your vocabulary and then review all you know - or think you know. Take your time there is an entire universe of learning to examine.

Much Peace...


Can you elaborate as to WHY they would bother?

In that one question I believe lies 2 lines worth of content.

Because it's never been answered. It cannot be answered. Because if you answer it, your facade of reality falls down. You're not that special. You don't warrant such an elaborate hoax about the planets around this one. It serves no purpose to invent and then perpetuate a lie about sending a flippin' robot to mars.

But with the delusions of grandeur that many here have, they can see - oh boy oh boy they're trying a swifty, pulling the wool over my eyes, they are oh boy oh boy I'm onto them sneaky NASAs... I'll confound them with my reality, and then stump them with my truth.

And when they are silent, in the face of my obnoxious claims, I will see it as validation of my beliefs.

Why wont Nasa tell me about the golden kellogs boxes on the evil side of Neptune? They won't even admit there is an evil side, so how can we trust them about anything!!!!!!

GOD SHOOT ME WITH A LASA BOLT NAO PLX!
edit on 12-12-2012 by winofiend because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 0bserver1
First of all I think this is one of the most amazing self-portrait I ever have seen from Curiosity.
And as always its taken on beautiful day with blue skies........

But some elements of this picture makes no sense to me and a bit curious ? , Like how could they manage to make this picture without someone else making this shot? because it looks like the photo made with a wide angle lens? and where are the tracks on the left bottom side come from? (marked with red arrow) because they look like footsteps to me?




Full size Self-Portait Curiosity

But as always around assumption out of proportional visions , curiosity kills the thread..

peace....
edit on 12-12-2012 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)


I had similar thoughts when I watched the Apollo 11 moon landing of 1969. I couldn't help but wonder how the initial "first step for mankind" camera was positioned -- was it attached to one of the landers' legs? Did they go out there and put it in place prior to the "first step"? I'm not entirely convinced by the "wire" videos (and other photographic "proof"), that claim that the whole thing was staged, but the explanation about the MESA (Modularized Equipment Stowage Assembly) isn't entirely satisfying either. Everything I've seen so far shows all the equipment wrapped and strapped within thermal blankets, meaning that at the very least, someone would've had to go out there to deploy the thing. That would make the "first step" shot technically a "second step" shot, and kind of disingenuous global fib at the very least.
edit on 12-12-2012 by transmundane because: Funny grammar



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by transmundane
 


There was a handle just outside the door. They built the camera into the landing leg of the LEM, and had it prepointed at the door. When Neil Armstrong was on the ladder, he pulled the handle, and the camera dropped out of the leg on its arm. No one had to go out and set anything up.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by transmundane
 


There was a handle just outside the door. They built the camera into the landing leg of the LEM, and had it prepointed at the door. When Neil Armstrong was on the ladder, he pulled the handle, and the camera dropped out of the leg on its arm. No one had to go out and set anything up.


I think you may be partially mistaken about this (I just discovered this myself so not pointing finger
) -- the handle was for the package that was within the lander and which contained additional equipment (the whole thing dropped out, supported by a strap that had to be disassembled by hand). The whole thing was packed in a heat blanket, but I was able to find a photo that shows the camera poking out of it. But now that I'm watching the footage again, there seems to have been an additional unmanned camera on top of the lander (it capture both astronauts from a good height and from what seems to be outside of the lander).
There's mention of one inside the lander module (which captured the landing and shows the window during recording), so it seems reasonable that all of the cameras were protected in some way. It's reasonable to think that maybe it was put out there after the astronauts disembarked, but the information on this seems somewhat scarce.
edit on 12-12-2012 by transmundane because: updated



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by winofiend
 


While I understand and fully respect your point of view I have seen too much and know that I must ask questions.I see politicians promising this and promising that and nothing ever changes. Every second person has cancer or knows someone who has cancer. Why aren't we all well and healthy and flourishing after all it is 2012?

Only a psychopath, sociopath or narcissist would spend money on missions into outer space - whether a facade or not - when so many here on Earth need help.

NASA control their information so tightly - one day it will snap. Controlling information is about controlling people. I want absolute honestly when it comes to space exploration. There have been far too many mistakes made and telling people that "it was a weather balloon" will not work anymore.

Where there is one lie there will be many. The rover may very well be in space and it may very well be right here on planet Earth on film production lot (think about how much security surrounds those) and it could be in the desert (think about how much security surrounds Area 51.)

Photographs are a strong focal point for any sentient being with eyeballs that function - it is what goes on in the brain that they are attached to that matters. Just because I present you with a photograph and some text telling you what it represents - does not mean you have to believe. Just accepting evidence with text at face value is literal thinking.

As an example - I have fair skin and will often throw a light long sleeved shirt on when I go out. It is the middle of summer and stinking hot and a person will say aren't you hot in that shirt??? I do not know how many times I have replied with - look at me and think laterally. And the times people stare at me and stare at me and just don't get it. I have to tell them that I am protecting my skin from the sun not trying to stay warm!!!!

Much Peace...



edit on 13-12-2012 by Amanda5 because: grammar



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Amanda5
 


sorry for my late reply , I couldn't even think of this thread could be taken serious , let alone that the forum mod had shut it down because of another thread was already going.

So I'm not the only one that thinks the imprint of Imaginable footprints are false?
I do also see other strange things that I can't place , like on far right in the distance hills I see something reflecting Sun light , could be the vehicle that dropped curiosity , but it seems to large to me. an also on the right at in the skies I see black orbs or if some rather call it flying rocks?
But that's just my opinion it has nothing to hold or back it up...



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by transmundane
 


Indeed you start to notice things that don't totally coop with the reality this all happened.
I still can't really figure out how the supposedly strange footprint markings got there in the fireplace? really weird
.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Amanda5
 


By your logic (NASA employing artist), then everything that is grey must be an elephant.

I guess the ESA has been lying all this time too, eh? And of course the Russians, China, Japan, and even India.

That some how, NASA is faking those telemetry signals that come from Mars......or Saturn (Cassini), and all the other probes out there.

You're upset about the money they get from the US government (which is a drop in the bucket, and wouldn't feed a whole country for more that 2 weeks by the way), and how they are wasting it on space.......yet you are claiming that they are faking everything...........



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0bserver1
reply to post by transmundane
 


Indeed you start to notice things that don't totally coop with the reality this all happened.
I still can't really figure out how the supposedly strange footprint markings got there in the fireplace? really weird
.


Did you even use the links I gave you and read the other thread?

Those are not "foot prints".

They are hole made by the rover's scooper for analyzing the soil. Here is one of the raw images used that show them up close:



Link to the full, high resolution picture

Go ahead and take a look at the full high resolution picture, and then come back and tell us that those are foot prints.





 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join