Late last year, Z posted some links to high quality Moon photos. Well I haven't done much anomaly research on the Moon, but did look through some of Z's link photos. As I remember it, I did see some things of interest, but I don't think I posted anything on it.
Well today, while going through some of my desktop stuff, I found a screenshot I am quite sure I didn't post. I do suspect it probably has been seen and posted before, here or elsewhere, because it is so very obvious. I think it to be pretty outstanding, but then what do I know? :) Comparing the size of this crater to others, we might can assume this to be"significantly large", whatever it is.
But on the chance that it has not been posted here (couldn't find anything on it), I am going to post my screenshot for you to see. I am sure some of you moon-guys/ladies may have seen this before - somewhere- and maybe you can tell us what you know about it. This "Moon anomaly" is so seeable, it doesn't need to a locator be put on it! :))
No, I did not save the source-file info- it could be from the Clementine stuff. I might can find it again, if anyone needs it!
(http://s13.postimg.org/udwpo3a9j/Crater_with_Square_Structure.jpg)
Yes, that's from Clementine. :)
The square is probably (I have to check) a missing photo, as all those images were made from the smallish (I think they were something like 300 pixels wide) photos.
ArMaP, wouldn't missing pics be one flat color and not gradient-filled like We see in this image? Mighty precise a location for a "missing pic...
Thanks for the comments! I did find the source file, and it is a Clementine farside tiff.
I have magnified it a little more, and will post another pic, along with the Clementine link. This does make the square even a little more clear, maybe even to the point of defining whether it is a photo glitch or not? This crater is located near the left side of this link layout, and up some distance from the bottom of it.
http://ser.sese.asu.edu/MOON/CLEM_COLOR/farside.tiff
(http://s27.postimg.org/48bp12bb7/Crater_With_Square_Structure_Mag.jpg)
It looks a lot less like a "glitch," a missing pic, and more like someOne erased something there...
I agree Amaterasu, you nailed it! looks just like the center of the creator was erased and filled with a color selected from the creator rim. Within the area in question there is also no dimensional perspective at all. Also in the picture with the tapering lines and such, the shadowing is not consistent with the shadows of the terrain. A product of using an auto fill type tool. Easy to do with even a very simple photo editing program.
There are so many great moon anomaly pictures in the moon structures thread, I don't remember the name of that thread just now but it's one of the old ones. Sgt.RocknRoll did/does some really cool image work on some of the pictures in that thread as well as others.
Every time you look at the moon .... are you getting mooned?
WhatTheHey
Quote from: rdunk on June 09, 2014, 05:29:52 PM
This does make the square even a little more clear, maybe even to the point of defining whether it is a photo glitch or not?
That's not a photo glitch because that's not a photo, that's a mosaic made from hundreds of 288 × 384 pixels photos.
I will try to locate the original photos. :)
Well... If that is an area they "happened" to miss pics from... Pretty fishy if You ask Me.
Any one want to think that they might have started with a very poor photo of the Moon from Earth and are placing the photos over it as they came in so they would have reference. Google Earth/Moon does this every day. A cleaner photo over a poor one.
Deuem
I suppose it might be worthwhile to mention.................in my previously looking over this fairly large display of the moon's surface, I have seen no other feature with any degree of similarity to this anomaly. This may not be a structure at all but, pray-tell, where in these such photos is/are other similarities that are determined to actually be photo error?? If that explains this one, then where are the others here that support that determination?? ;) ;)
And the similarities are not relative the small segments of the longer gray lines we can see in these pics!
I've seen many mosaics with missing data..
Quote from: rdunk on June 10, 2014, 03:16:10 AM
This may not be a structure at all but, pray-tell, where in these such photos is/are other similarities that are determined to actually be photo error??
No photo error, a missing image that prevents the creation of a complete mosaic.
QuoteIf that explains this one, then where are the others here that support that determination?? ;) ;)
In the Clementine mosaics that are dozens of cases like this. The image you posted has several.
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/Marte_7.jpg)
QuoteAnd the similarities are not relative the small segments of the longer gray lines we can see in these pics!
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. ???
Here's one of the sub-mosaics used to make that large TIFF image.
The original 5 channels IMG file was taken from this page (http://pdsimage.wr.usgs.gov/archive/clem1-l-u-5-dim-uvvis-v1.0/cl_4027/browse/color/medium/ui45s095.htm), converted to a CUB file with ISIS and then converted to a PNG (that is too big to upload to the Pegasus image gallery) and converted to a JPG. The 950 nm channel was used for the red, the 750 nm for the green and the 415 for the blue.
(click for full size)
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/ui45s095_img_cub.jpg) (http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/ui45s095_img_cub.jpg)
It's easy to see where the images for each (cyan and magenta, meaning that the images for the red and green channels are missing) or all channels (black) are missing.
I'm still looking for the original images, as those are harder to find, I have to use the coordinates for the centre of each image and search them on my database with all of the 1,900,276 images, but as today is a national holiday I have more time. :)
Well, now I see those little squares (rectangles), but still, the one in the crater is fishy because it's NOT a square (rectangle). There are uneven edges. Almost as if a planned placement in that location missed a bit and They went in and covered it up... But I am sure there is a better explanation.
Quote from: Amaterasu on June 10, 2014, 05:10:31 PM
There are uneven edges.
The uneven edges do not exist in the image I posted.
PS: you can see that, although the images are perfect rectangles (the original images are 384x288), they appear slanted. That's because of the need of "map projecting" the images, the changing of the images so four corners of the image correspond to the exact locations on the Moon's (in this case) surface. That's one of the reasons the photos from mapping missions are taken the closest to 90º from the surface as possible, so they are not subject to too much distortion when they are map projected.
I could only find the photos for the East side of the crater, so here's a small, 6 images mosaic made with the photos from the "A" filter (I think that's the 415 nm one).
(http://www.thelivingmoon.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/lua1793e_stitch.png)
PS: Looking at this small mosaic I can see that the sides of the several photos are not all perfectly aligned, so we get some "steps" on the sides, including at the centre of the crater.
Quote from: ArMaP on June 10, 2014, 12:51:33 PM
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by that. ???
There are quite a few of the little gray patches, as you identified, but this anomaly is obviously not the same as those. If you notice there are several vertical gray lines, some with those little splotchy gray spots. Tat is what I meant.
this anomaly may end up being nothing at all, but it certainly looks more like "something", than do the other "nothings" you identified! :)
Quote from: rdunk on June 10, 2014, 11:43:22 PM
There are quite a few of the little gray patches, as you identified, but this anomaly is obviously not the same as those.
I think I understand it now, but I don't understand what difference do you find between that specific "gray patch" and the others.
Quote from: ArMaP on June 11, 2014, 12:16:52 AM
I think I understand it now, but I don't understand what difference do you find between that specific "gray patch" and the others.
ArMaP, to me, the gray area seems to have depth (2D/3D). whereas the other areas have the appearance of either void areas, or just pieces of the common gray streaks in this "photo" (or whatever you call this Clementine picture). When I look closely at the near side of the "anomaly" in the crater, I believe I can see that it is a wall, with some height - just say'in - and the gray areas you noted do not.
Additionally as is easy to see in my OP pic, and as Amy also noted, the gray area in the crater has very specific non-symeteric features along its outer perimeter lines. :)
Quote from: rdunk on June 11, 2014, 04:23:53 AM
ArMaP, to me, the gray area seems to have depth (2D/3D). whereas the other areas have the appearance of either void areas, or just pieces of the common gray streaks in this "photo" (or whatever you call this Clementine picture).
That's strange, I don't see any thing that can be seen as a sign of depth on the image you posted. Do you see that on the image I posted?
QuoteWhen I look closely at the near side of the "anomaly" in the crater, I believe I can see that it is a wall, with some height - just say'in - and the gray areas you noted do not.
What do you mean by "near side"? ???
QuoteAdditionally as is easy to see in my OP pic, and as Amy also noted, the gray area in the crater has very specific non-symeteric features along its outer perimeter lines. :)
Look at the image I posted, converted from the original IMG file.
I apologise to Rdunk, and he's a respected member.
However, all these threads on 'non-images' are getting a bit tiresome.