NASA has released images of the other side of the Moon that we've never seen before.
A number of people who've seen NASA's annual lunar phase and libration videos have asked what the other side of the Moon looks like, the side that can't be seen from the Earth. This video answers that question. The imagery was created using Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter data.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/nasa-images-dark-side-moon-earth-lunar-reconnaissance-orbiter-2015-2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdkMHkF7BaA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdkMHkF7BaA
LROC is a fake representation of what the moon is. Areas seem unreal.
The real moon is occupied. As this video shows from Apollo 11. Not great quality, it is the area depicted in as08-12-2189
https://youtu.be/R7QKSqWr_Gs
A good demo showing great detail.
https://youtu.be/VgYNhhLZUtg
NASA add brightness and contrast to hide detail.
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 12, 2017, 06:41:35 PM
NASA add brightness and contrast to hide detail.
That's interesting, from what I have seen, people that accuse NASA of that are the ones that change the images to make them look like they want. :)
The video you posted, for example, has a worse image quality than the original on the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPM5LcRjAmU
A bleached out see nothing video to hide what is really there.
All i did was reduce contrast and brightness.
I need to find an alternative to Photobucket.
You need to update your Photobucket account.... ;)
Im not paying $400 a year for it I will upload the images another way soon.
This is a video I made to show image manipulation and what is on the moon you can pause it at any time.
https://youtu.be/TBok1k3r-MM
Facebook page I'm working with
https://www.facebook.com/AlienEarthMoon/
I dont do anything for money I'm doing it all for free because the truth is worth more than money.
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on July 13, 2017, 02:08:18 PM
You need to update your Photobucket account.... ;)
A temporary setback, facecrook now own photobucket, what swines.......
If I wasnt paranoid?
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 13, 2017, 03:02:26 PM
If I wasnt paranoid?
With all the Doom porn and fake crap being posted every 5 minutes, why be paranoid (unless you are violating NDA's or security classifications)
Post it to YouTube...
Pegasus does have a utube channel and a photo gallery available after you meet minimum requirements
8)
Seeker
Quote from: The Seeker on July 13, 2017, 03:14:24 PM
Pegasus does have a utube channel and a photo gallery available after you meet minimum requirements
8)
Seeker
Oh thanks for letting me know :)
Thanks for the video, but I think you are preaching to the choir here, although there are a few here that will dispute your evidence.
And it's not the 'dark' side but the FARSIDE.... ;) ;D just pulling the leg.... ;D
Quote from: Sgt.Rocknroll on July 13, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Thanks for the video, but I think you are preaching to the choir here, although there are a few here that will dispute your evidence.
And it's not the 'dark' side but the FARSIDE.... ;) ;D just pulling the leg.... ;D
I'm happy to be preaching to the quire which means I wont need to post too much to explain and I will be choosy about what images I post, I call it the dark side although I know it is the far side due to lunar lock. There is no dark side, in fact it is all dark ;)
Please don't stop, I really enjoy someone that's interested in the same thing I do. Besides I'm kinda tired of the Mandela thing. Lolololol
:)
Rock 8)
I'm in the process of moving my photos onto flickr
As far as my research goes I have seen images that show detail one day only to find them gone the next.
I tried to post some of what I found before photobucket donned a tri corn hat and mask whilst brandishing a flintlock then demanding $399 ? Robbers. holding people to ransom like that.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/150974590@N04/35769758841/in/shares-eq5xG3/
An odd request for you Lunar Mapper's
Could you folke take the tour de france route's data and superimpose that onto know lunar data in regards to Elevation?
I think it would be really cool to superimpose Earth's biggest bike race elevation's onto the Moon to give people some real perspective of the crater's!
Just a thought!
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 13, 2017, 01:58:38 PM
All i did was reduce contrast and brightness.
And doing that you reduced even more the image quality.
Many people think that images with higher contrast have more detail, but it's usually the opposite. Almost any time you change something in an image you are reducing its quality. The only action that increases detail and doesn't remove any data is "stretching" the image, as that "spreads" all the colours or grey levels in an image to all the available possibilities, so an image that has the darkest grey level as 10 and the brightest at 240 is changed so the darkest becomes 0 and the brightest 255. By separating more the different levels of grey it's easier for people to see more detail, although it's the same as before.
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 13, 2017, 02:16:38 PM
Only to find that years later with the rise of the information age people can uncover what they had tried so desperately to hide.
If they removed any thing nobody can put it back, removed is removed.
Quote from: ArMaP on July 13, 2017, 09:18:31 PM
And doing that you reduced even more the image quality.
Many people think that images with higher contrast have more detail, but it's usually the opposite. Almost any time you change something in an image you are reducing its quality. The only action that increases detail and doesn't remove any data is "stretching" the image, as that "spreads" all the colours or grey levels in an image to all the available possibilities, so an image that has the darkest grey level as 10 and the brightest at 240 is changed so the darkest becomes 0 and the brightest 255. By separating more the different levels of grey it's easier for people to see more detail, although it's the same as before.
The quality was rubbish to start with.
Rubbish in = Rubbish out. Its a loosing battle in some respects however I still stand by what I said by reducing contrast and brightness you can start to see anomalies in images and videos from NASA and other agencies.. I'm still learning how to do it, im not an expert photo/video editor The following images from apollo 11 help to show how bright overexposure helps obscure detail. Part of the problem is many of the images are not great quality to start with.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/150974590@N04/35905515955/in/dateposted-public/
Quote from: ArMaP on July 13, 2017, 10:18:51 PM
If they removed any thing nobody can put it back, removed is removed.
Not removed but obscured, they are dab hands at it now. Just look at LROC. They have made the moon look as if it is made out of cement.
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 13, 2017, 10:43:02 PM
The quality was rubbish to start with.
Start by working with TIFF images, if available, that way you are not going to be enhancing JPEG artefacts. :)
QuoteRubbish in = Rubbish out. Its a loosing battle in some respects however I still stand by what I said by reducing contrast and brightness you can start to see anomalies in images and videos from NASA and other agencies..
I'm sure you can see anomalies, my doubt is if that they were there before or were created by your processing.
QuoteI'm still learning how to do it, im not an expert photo/video editor The following images from apollo 11 help to show how bright overexposure helps obscure detail. Part of the problem is many of the images are not great quality to start with.
The first thing to learn is that there are no miracles, if you work with a JPEG you will see some artefacts, specially after enhancing the image, as that enhances the artefacts.
I have seen many, many times people talking about anomalies that are only JPEG artefacts.
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 13, 2017, 10:46:13 PM
Not removed but obscured, they are dab hands at it now. Just look at LROC. They have made the moon look as if it is made out of cement.
If they wanted to hide things they would do it and nobody would notice a thing.
Quote from: ArMaP on July 14, 2017, 12:12:26 AM
If they wanted to hide things they would do it and nobody would notice a thing.
They do but a 1960's photo lab is no match for modern computers.
Jpeg artifacts or Bln year old alien technology? I dont buy the Jpeg argument sorry mate.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/150974590@N04/sets/72157684038222800
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 14, 2017, 09:32:14 AM
They do but a 1960's photo lab is no match for modern computers.
Wrong, a 1960s photo lab could whatever they wanted with the photos.
My elder sister is a professional photographer and she had some years ago she had a lab. One thing that can be done in a lab to a negative or a photo is to paint directly in it with a thin brush and black ink. If the changes are from black to white (or transparent, if it's on the film) then they scrape the emulsion from the surface of the film.
QuoteJpeg artifacts or Bln year old alien technology? I dont buy the Jpeg argument sorry mate.
I'm not selling it. ;)
But you should consider JPEG artefacts, they do exist, and I think I saw some cases in your video. I will try to find some.
Quote from: ArMaP on July 14, 2017, 02:04:31 PM
But you should consider JPEG artefacts, they do exist, and I think I saw some cases in your video. I will try to find some.
Not everything worth looking at is in tiff format.
You will be able to find JPEG artefacts in some of my images agreed, part of the problem is caused by blowing up the images too big where we start to loose coherency in the image and we get pixilation (anything image software wise by Microdross isnt even worth using, their picture editing tools are less than useless) What I do to try to negate that is to use a Jewellers Loop to really get a good look at the images on a reasonable quality display without blowing them up where they start to break apart, not easy when I'm doing everything on the cheap. When you look at an image like AS08-12-2189 it's easy to get carried away because it is such a significant photo however glass domes are not a JPEG artefact. I've noticed the moon seems to have a hex lattice sub structure to it, like a sort of alien bee hive?
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 14, 2017, 03:53:55 PM
Not everything worth looking at is in tiff format.
Yes, that's a problem, but there are several photos in TIFF format available, starting with most of those low contrast images, like AS10-27-3875 (https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/SearchPhotos/photo.pl?mission=AS10&roll=27&frame=3875), on the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth. Most (all, if they finished working on them, I haven't followed the project for some time) of the panoramic and metric photos from Apollo 15, 16 and 17 were scanned at high resolutions and are available in huge (1.2 GB) versions from the Apollo Image Archive (http://apollo.sese.asu.edu/index.html).
QuoteWhen you look at an image like AS08-12-2189 it's easy to get carried away because it is such a significant photo however glass domes are not a JPEG artefact.
I'm sure what you call "glass domes" are not JPEG artefacts, as those artefacts are typically rectangular.
QuoteI've noticed the moon seems to have a hex lattice sub structure to it, like a sort of alien bee hive?
I've seen that on some photos, but don't forget that an hexagon is the easiest shape to make, you just have to draw several same size circles next to each other, they arrange themselves hexagonally.
AS10-27-3875 is one of the most compelling images IMO because it shows many very interesting artefacts. Images of entities are ìncredibly thin on the ground, the beings ard incredibly illusive for sure.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/150974590@N04/albums/72157686150059566
I can see a masquarading android head where just below at the 5'Oclock possition an entity can be seen? I am working on producing the images in a much higher clarity.
It raises more questions than it answers.
Your link isn't working.
Quote from: ArMaP on July 15, 2017, 12:11:29 AM
Your link isn't working.
https://www.flickr.com/gp/150974590@N04/8ZxU67
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 15, 2017, 12:26:27 AM
https://www.flickr.com/gp/150974590@N04/8ZxU67
That s good example of how JPEG artefacts may change an image.
Here's a GIF animation that shows the JPEG blocks grid over the image, to show how those straight lines are the result of the JPEG compression.
The image was resized to 500% to make it easier to see the 8x8 pixel blocks.
(http://i.imgur.com/WJTtFZh.gif)
And here's the same area from a TIFF version, at 100%.
(http://i.imgur.com/7lmxO0O.png)
Like I said, if I could find images such as AS08-12-2189 and 2190 in Tiff format I would use them.
I took a screenshot from that video I ruined. Its incredible, amazing structures and a biosphere in the lower area.
Whadaya think?
https://flic.kr/p/WynnJg
There is no hiding it.....
We know next to nothing about our true history, thanks to stuffy old warmongers in suits from 60 years ago.
If you blow up an image 500% in any format you are asking for trouble, that's why I use jewelers loops because at some stage the image will collapse.
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 15, 2017, 07:19:55 PM
Like I said, if I could find images such as AS08-12-2189 and 2190 in Tiff format I would use them.
Here you go. :)
https://meocloud.pt/link/744a36e6-fe8b-451a-8150-068454efa5e0/AS08-12-2189.tif/
https://meocloud.pt/link/916d1ea0-dc47-4e3f-bed8-f13cf1967e98/AS08-12-2190.tif/
I downloaded those images from here (https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/SearchPhotos/). Just put the ID of the photo you're looking for in the text area at the end of the page, hit the "Run query" button and, when on the page of each photo (like this one (https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/SearchPhotos/photo.pl?mission=AS08&roll=12&frame=2190)) click on the "All download options" button at the right bottom of the page and see if they have the "Raw file from camera" or similar option, with a "Request" link next to it.
QuoteI took a screenshot from that video I ruined. Its incredible, amazing structures and a biosphere in the lower area.
Whadaya think?
I see nothing special, but I am known for seeing only rocks. :)
Quote from: Lunarstation on July 15, 2017, 07:33:51 PM
If you blow up an image 500% in any format you are asking for trouble, that's why I use jewelers loops because at some stage the image will collapse.
I only resized the image to make it easier to see the 8x8 pixel artefacts and how they change the shape of small features on the photo.
I thought everybody would understand it, but apparently I was wrong.
Quote from: ArMaP on July 15, 2017, 09:19:18 PM
Here you go. :)
https://meocloud.pt/link/744a36e6-fe8b-451a-8150-068454efa5e0/AS08-12-2189.tif/
https://meocloud.pt/link/916d1ea0-dc47-4e3f-bed8-f13cf1967e98/AS08-12-2190.tif/
I downloaded those images from here (https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/SearchPhotos/). Just put the ID of the photo you're looking for in the text area at the end of the page, hit the "Run query" button and, when on the page of each photo (like this one (https://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/SearchPhotos/photo.pl?mission=AS08&roll=12&frame=2190)) click on the "All download options" button at the right bottom of the page and see if they have the "Raw file from camera" or similar option, with a "Request" link next to it.
I see nothing special, but I am known for seeing only rocks. :)
No problem, I apreciate the help. Thanks for the links and advice :)