A beauty of a Curiosity image.

Has this image been discused on ATS?
Its awesome IMO,check out the big image and zoom in around it folks.
You can zoom in alot if you save the image.


www.nasa.gov...



Zoom in to see some incredible rock formations,including alot of evidence of volcanic activity IMHO.
Whaddaya think?
Cool picture or what?

Not as amazing as your avatar. what the hell is that thing???

Originally posted by allbab
Not as amazing as your avatar. what the hell is that thing???

That is an Axolotl Sir,an Aztec critter of the Salamander type.
I look after a few of them.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Silcone Synapse


So, who took this picture?

I know someone will tell me that an arm of the rover took the picture, but I don't see how.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse

Did Curiosity's curiosity cause him to start chewing on the picture?



Seriously though, why does the image look like all outside edges have been violently torn off?

Originally posted by windword

So, who took this picture?

I know someone will tell me that an arm of the rover took the picture, but I don't see how.

I really have no idea. I don't know much about at all about Curiosity, but I'll make 1 guess and say that he set the lens up on some sort of little tripod thingy, then set the timer, and quickly backed up.

cool pic. i like poring over these looking for pareidolia- type stuff or just interesting details like the one below.

reply to post by RoScoLaz

cool pic. i like poring over these looking for pareidolia- type stuff or just interesting details like the one below.

Me too. Who can resist taking a stroll around Mars!?

Here's something interesting. Looks like a fallen column, that has saw marks.

Ahh, the (in)famous Curiosity self portrait...
Here is useful link for the explanation. Just shows how NASA's graphic designers are versed in using photoshop techniques.

Anyway, odd inprint on the surface which is different than tyre pattern. Anyone to offer explanation?

@zilebeliveunknown, windword - those exact 2 features were the other things that caught my eye

It's a fantastic image (or rather a mosaic of many images). I posted it a month ago in this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...

The images were taken by the MAHLI camera on the end of the rover's robotic arm. It's like taking a picture of yourself while hoding the camera in your outstretched arm. You don't see the robotic arm in this mosaic because the images were it appears were replaced by identical images where the arm was out of shot. I'd like to point out that it's not due to photoshopping wizadry at NASA; I personally used the raw individual images from mars.jpl.nasa.gov... to assemble the mosaic using Microsoft ICE software. The software automatically erased the arm. The result can be seen here: photosynth.net... (tip: go fullscreen, and use the mouse to "drag" the view around)

Here's something even more incredible: Andrei Bodrov used this self-portrait along with images of the surrounding landscape to create a full 360-degree panorama. www.360cities.net... Although it must be said that not everything you see there is real. Most of the sky and the Sun were photoshopped in, and some shortcuts were made to make the terrain stitch seamlessly.

reply to post by RoScoLaz

You know I was thinking something about pareidolia... I've read somewhere that 90% of the information coming through our eyes is lost on its way to the brain. Now imagine if our eyes are able to recieve such an amount of informations, we would be able to see totally different reality, how cool that would be.
With that being said, I am forced to not to believe what I'm seeing, knowing that reality could be very different.

reply to post by zilebeliveunknown

They are tire prints. The right side of photo down low is full of them. The odd ones look like where curiosity pivoted. You can also see the white frosty stuff turned up. Remember the wet wheels? You can see it here too. I assume the volatiles will "melt" and evaporate from the rubber tire (which is black) first as they absorb the suns heat faster than the surface. Heres a screen shot of the wet tire, you can still see white stuff on the ground in the background...


... before the photographer took a picture.... Of course, don't you see him? They forgot to photo shop him out of the reflection in the lens of the main camera. Yah, you don't see him? He's wearing sunglasses and has a crewcut...

Originally posted by zilebeliveunknown
Anyway, odd inprint on the surface which is different than tyre pattern. Anyone to offer explanation?

Have another look at the tyre. It matches both patterns.

Originally posted by intrptr
... before the photographer took a picture...

. Of course, don't you see him? They forgot to photo shop him out of the reflection in the lens of the main camera. Yah, you don't see him? He's wearing sunglasses and has a crewcut...

ahh man I was gonna do a screen grab of that for laughs.

reply to post by Silcone Synapse

Thanks for bringing that image. I love to scour it. Nothing like you say than a close up of a patch of ground on another planet. It gives me reality shivers... how cool to be looking at the surface of a planet so far away and yet on my computer screen?

That machine in all its detail is an awesome scientific accomplishment too. Amazing times...

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by Silcone Synapse

 

Thanks for bringing that image. I love to scour it. Nothing like you say than a close up of a patch of ground on another planet. It gives me reality shivers... how cool to be looking at the surface of a planet so far away and yet on my computer screen?

That machine in all its detail is an awesome scientific accomplishment too. Amazing times...

Too right Buddy,I am still examining each rock in the distance,and you can see little bits of rock/dust which have accumulated upon the top of curiosity.

I will still be zooming in on this pic for hours yet.

Originally posted by intrptr

... before the photographer took a picture...

. Of course, don't you see him? They forgot to photo shop him out of the reflection in the lens of the main camera. Yah, you don't see him? He's wearing sunglasses and has a crewcut...

I saw that also,he is a creepy clone I rek,look at those red tubes going into his head from the right side.
The sneaky NASA gnome clone who controls the so called robotic curiosity,taking sneaky pictures...

You have busted the whole scam intrptr-good work Bro!

To me beautiful is when nasa, jpl, malin etc. come clean about what is really going on in so many thousands of images. Until the truth comes out there is not one image I would call "beautiful". Because there IS TRULYunatural artifacts by the thousands upon thousands and so much more. Nothing can be given the name of beautiful when so much ugliness is happening with thousands and thousands of mars images. So much deception, to reveal then conceal is just deceptive and I do not blame Richard Hoagland one bit for being upset about it. He truly has the right to be, because he and so many others are coming out with the truth about the (leak and deny routine).

reply to post by wildespace

Originally posted by wildespace

It's a fantastic image (or rather a mosaic of many images).

So that's why the outside areas of the image look all torn up?

Originally posted by wildespace

The images were taken by the MAHLI camera on the end of the rover's robotic arm. It's like taking a picture of yourself while hoding the camera in your outstretched arm. You don't see the robotic arm in this mosaic because the images were it appears were replaced by identical images where the arm was out of shot. I'd like to point out that it's not due to photoshopping wizadry at NASA;

That clearly explains why the arm can't be seen, and makes perfect sense, but why would NASA wanna do that? That's just begging for the accusations of being Photoshopped.


I suppose they may do it just to screw with people.

Originally posted by thetiler
To me beautiful is when nasa, jpl, malin etc. come clean about what is really going on in so many thousands of images.

Have you ever thought of the possibility of being wrong?