A beauty of a Curiosity image.

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
That clearly explains why the arm can't be seen, and makes perfect sense, but why would NASA wanna do that?

For the same reason I want, because it gives us a better idea of how things look.



That's just begging for the accusations of being Photoshopped.

Do you think that they are worried about it? They are always accused of that, regardless of doing it or not.




posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


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...



He's not actually a photographer. It's similar to a movie theater. He's in the projection room, and is just there to switch the reels. The alleged camera lens underneath him, is actually the projector. He's not alone though. His buddy's on the other side.




 
 
reply to post by thetiler

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. 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.
Even IF you're correct, that doesn't necessarily mean that they know the actual truth.


Originally posted by thetiler

Nothing can be given the name of beautiful when so much ugliness is happening with thousands and thousands of mars images.
Since beauty is in the eye of the beholder, anything can be given the name of 'Beautiful' by anyone.



posted on Mar, 9 2013 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Here is my take on all of those images:

gigapan.com...



And to the person who asked why it looks like the picture is ripped off at the edges: It's a mosaic - many pictures composited into one. That's how it works. It's normal.



posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
[...] 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.


Not at all. If I remember correctly, the main purpose of the self-portrait was to see how much dust accumulated on the rover since the previous self-portrait. It's also a great public outreach image.

If your question is about the robotic arm specifically, I think it's invisible in the mosaic simply because in most of the images it was out of shot. You can see how the arm moved for each of the shots in this animation:



Small parts of the arm are visible in a couple of images. But as in each of those images the arm was pointed the opposite way, revealing the terrain obscured in the other image, the panorama-stitching software automatically erased the arm to reveal the terrain. Here are those images:





And the result from my stitching software (Microsoft ICE):
edit on 10-3-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 06:53 AM
link   
You actually can see the "photographer" in the reflection. The MAHLI camera is part of the instrument turret, shown here by the arrow:




And here's the "photographer" himself, the MAHLI camera seen here in the middle of the turret (with the lens covered for protection).



posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by wildespace
 


Originally posted by wildespace

.....If I remember correctly, the main purpose of the self-portrait was to see how much dust accumulated on the rover since the previous self-portrait. It's also a great public outreach image.
Both of which would have been accomplished just the same, even if the arm was visible within the picture.

To me, splicing many images together just seemed like an unnecessary task which requires more effort.



[color=A9CDE8]I suppose I should clarify something though: Yesterday, at the time I was first making those statements, I didn't realize it was 66 different images stitched together, which obviously creates a much more detailed image. I was probably just thinking it was only a few images.







 
 
reply to post by ArMaP

Originally posted by ArMaP

Do you think that they are worried about it? They are always accused of that, regardless of doing it or not.

Worried? I highly doubt it.

Tired of continuously hearing the same accusations over and over? Probably.
(I know I would be tired of hearing it.)






edit on 3/10/13 by BrokenCircles because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
Both of which would have been accomplished just the same, even if the arm was visible within the picture.

To me, splicing many images together just seemed like an unnecessary task which requires more effort.


Nah, it takes about 5 minutes if you use a software that does it automatically.

If you watch the video I posted above, you'll see that the arm has joints much like a human's arm, and while taking the images it was bent away from the field of view. What I'm trying to say is that it didn't take special effort and wizadry at NASA to make the arm invisible. It's simply the result of how the robotic arm works and how the software stitched the images together.



posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 10:22 AM
link   

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. 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).



Well look how wrong you were about the Mars tubes if you think you have something start another thread about it.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 04:15 AM
link   
I made a mosaic to include part of the robotic arm, by excluding a couple of images that would overwrite it, and then covering any gaps left with terrain from the "armless" mosaic. Hopefully, seeing some of the arm will make people here happier.




You may ask, why not the rest of the arm. Well, imagine you're holding a camera in your hand and take a mosaic of your body. You elbow is naturally bent, so most of the arm is out of the frame. Even if you make your arm straight, catching it in the frame would require some difficult wrist bending. You can catch the shoulder and a bit of the upper arm, but showing the rest of the arm is nearly impossible. Besides, the upper segments of the robotic arm would be close to the camera and obscure the view of the rover.


P.S. Here's more analysis of how the arm was positioned for the self-portrait:

For the upper half of the mosaic, the "elbow" of the arm was bent so that most of the arm is below the frame.


For the lower half of the mosaic, the "elbow was bent so that most of the arm above the frame
edit on 12-3-2013 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Screenshots from the video I linked in this thread, illustrating the two different positions of the arm:




During the JPL press-conference that just had taken place (about the drilled rock sample) I asked in the chat whether it's possible for Curiosity to take a self-portrait with the robotic arm visible, and the people at JPL answered "no".



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by BrokenCircles

To me, splicing many images together just seemed like an unnecessary task which requires more effort.


Everything is done automatically via software, so it is no effort. The software is able to match up common points of interest in the many pictures and put them together like a jigsaw puzzle.

Also, the type of camera they use is actually very low megapixil, and instead focuses on the quality of arperture. When you take many, smaller, focused pictures and stitch them together you end up with a far better quality image than taking one, huge, many megapixil image. (another reason why those "9000 megapixil cameras" for $99 don't take good pictures, they have horrible image sensors and limited arperture.

If you do some research on the rover, it has enough memory onboard to stitch an entire 360 panorama and store it to be sent back to earth.





new topics
top topics
 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join