Mars Colour Pic

[Groundhog]

Maybe it's just the sci-fi geek in me, but did anyone else almost shed a tear when they saw the Mars colour pics?

This zoomed-in one in particular is just fantastic:

http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,3600,312858,00.jpg

[Peregrine]

Me too Groundhog, I have been blown away by the pictures I've seen so far. Did you see the one where the soil had been disturbed when the probe landed? I read where geologists are drooling to check that out, it's apparently some strange kind of soil composition that's unlike earths in terms of texture and how it reacts to stress.

[Groundhog]

Oh really, no I haven't. When it gets a little quieter here at work tonight I'll trawl the net for more pics.

It is truly great that something like this happened. It seemed as though everything re: space exploration had been put on the backburner, especially with the Columbia tradgedy.

I still won't hold my breath for a human crew mission to Mars, but hopefully I'll see it in my life time (statistically speaking, I got another 55 years to go ;) ).

[SackAttack]

LA Times had an article a while back about how NASA was 'sexing up' some of the pictures from the Hubble Telescope because they didn't really mesh with the image a lot of people had about outer space (thanks, Star Trek!).

I hope they aren't doing that with the Mars pics, because they're absolutely astonishing. I'd hate to think that they're airbrushing them or somesuch to try and build up some hype for the space program.

[Groundhog]

Good point SA, I wasn't aware of that article.

I certainly wouldn't put it past them, as I'm sure they wouldn't find getting funds an easy task. I'm sure some work went in to the pics to 'clean them up', but I hope they didn't clean them up the same way models and celebrities are 'cleaned up' when they appear on magazine covers....

[Peregrine]

This is the one I was referring to Groundhog. There's more on the same NASA page.

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/mer2004/rover-images/jan-06-2004/captions/image-5.html

[DanGarion]

Originally posted by SackAttack

I hope they aren't doing that with the Mars pics, because they're absolutely astonishing. I'd hate to think that they're airbrushing them or somesuch to try and build up some hype for the space program.

Space program? What space program they just produce those things on a back lot in LA man, they don't really send things up there.

[Groundhog]

Originally posted by dangarion
Space program? What space program they just produce those things on a back lot in LA man, they don't really send things up there.

Oh boy... ;)

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by dangarion
Space program? What space program they just produce those things on a back lot in LA man, they don't really send things up there.

I didn't realize Carl Everett was a poster on FOFC. Welcome, crazy guy who is now on the Expos. ;)

SI

[DanGarion]

I'm a firm lover and believer in the US Space Progam and NASA. Just needed to try and be funny today, had a very rough weekend.

[rkmsuf]

The story of how they built the two landers and got them to launch was facinating...it has been on NOVA up here in the northeast the last couple nights...

[sachmo71]

I think there will be a manned mission to Mars, maybe within the next 25 years.

[Thomkal]

Sadly there are people who think these pictures, and all pictures involving trips to space, such as the walk on the moon are nothing by Hollywood special effects.

And those who feel the reason many of the landers have failed is because the Martians are destroying them...

I've always been excited about the space program, but these days I begin to wonder if the money (a percentage of it, not all) would be better spent here on Planet Earth. Probably never would have thought that way before 9/11.

But the pictures of Mars sure are great, special effects or not. :)

[rkmsuf]

Originally posted by Thomkal
Sadly there are people who think these pictures, and all pictures involving trips to space, such as the walk on the moon are nothing by Hollywood special effects.

And those who feel the reason many of the landers have failed is because the Martians are destroying them...

I've always been excited about the space program, but these days I begin to wonder if the money (a percentage of it, not all) would be better spent here on Planet Earth. Probably never would have thought that way before 9/11.

But the pictures of Mars sure are great, special effects or not. :)

Actually the budget for these projects has plummetted since the Viking trips. I think this project was around 800 million while the Viking project was 900 million back in the 70s. Todays dollars that's in the billions. Things like powered landers were not an option today like the boom of the 70s space exploration...

[Ksyrup]

Until they beam back a shot of the Martian who anally probed me back in 1978, I won't believe these are real...

[BishopMVP]

Originally posted by SackAttack
LA Times had an article a while back about how NASA was 'sexing up' some of the pictures from the Hubble Telescope because they didn't really mesh with the image a lot of people had about outer space (thanks, Star Trek!).

I hope they aren't doing that with the Mars pics, because they're absolutely astonishing. I'd hate to think that they're airbrushing them or somesuch to try and build up some hype for the space program.

What I heard was that they took black and white pics and colored them in to make them look better. It's pretty much common knowledge in astronomical fields. I don't think they've done it with the Mars pictures.

[wbatl1]

Originally posted by BishopMVP
What I heard was that they took black and white pics and colored them in to make them look better. It's pretty much common knowledge in astronomical fields. I don't think they've done it with the Mars pictures.

Yeah, the camera apparently transmits a black and white photo, but with a huge number of different shades of black and white. Each of these colors corresponds to a color on earth I think. This reduces the transfer sixe of the photos by a lot. THey apperently have hundreds of men who work with these pictures to make sure the coloring comes out right, which is a reason some people believe they make the pictures up. I hope I'm right, as I remember reading this in a magazine a while back.

[cthomer5000]

Can someone just give me a basic description of how this mission differs from the one in the mid-90's?

Or a link to an article. I'm just curious to what the stated purpose is.

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by wbatl1
Yeah, the camera apparently transmits a black and white photo, but with a huge number of different shades of black and white. Each of these colors corresponds to a color on earth I think. This reduces the transfer sixe of the photos by a lot. THey apperently have hundreds of men who work with these pictures to make sure the coloring comes out right, which is a reason some people believe they make the pictures up. I hope I'm right, as I remember reading this in a magazine a while back.

This is called multi-spectral (or in some cases hyper-spectral) imaging. It also reveals a great deal of scientific information beyond what you see on the literal image. They can determine what substances may be present with this imagery, as well as see many things beyond the visual spectrum (gasses, radioactive material, etc).

They could make these colors into anything they want. But by using the spectral functions the processor can give you a literal image that is reasonably close to the real thing. It's got nothing to do with "sexing" up the image. It's just the most practical (and versatile) means to collect and transmit this type of data.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by Thomkal
Sadly there are people who think these pictures, and all pictures involving trips to space, such as the walk on the moon are nothing by Hollywood special effects.

FWIW, the kooks believe that we never landed a man on the moon (because they believe space is far more toxic - xrays, van halen belt :D and stuff - and the proper shielding would be too heavy to get into space) but they do recognize the unmanned stuff as legit.

[BishopMVP]

Originally posted by Leonidas
It's got nothing to do with "sexing" up the image. It's just the most practical (and versatile) means to collect and transmit this type of data.

Coloring the images in does have some to do with sexing it up for PR. Pretty colors look more spectacular and when a layperson sees a picture that looks stunning they are more likely to be interested in the article/picture than if it was black and white.

[Flame Eater]

The pictures are amazing, but (and maybe I'm dating myself here) doesn't anybody remember the Viking Lander Program back in the mid 70's. My God...as a kid I poured over 100's of photo's in every science mag I could find.

It's cool to see us having a presence on Mars again.