Yes, Mars Anomalies

[deuem]

Hi Amy,  rocks are always a problem for Deum And I only started to do some when Sky asked. So I don't have alot of Rock time. There is so much in the photo it overwhelms the program.

But If i had to guess from looking at what it gave me I would say the following.

All 3 large rocks have selection lines around them in the dark areas and have been worked. The top right one the most and the bottom the least. The top right rock has lost all of its deffinition lines and now looks to be just a few colors. On therest of the photo there are some flat rocks, center and 9 Oclock that have been blurred in place the white shows swirls.
The bottom rock has a white section that went to 100% white, the only place on the print that large of that white. Maybe all of that white was altered a bit. Again missing deffinition.

Am I even close?
Deuem

[Amaterasu]

Hi Amy,  rocks are always a problem for Deum And I only started to do some when Sky asked. So I don't have alot of Rock time. There is so much in the photo it overwhelms the program.

But If i had to guess from looking at what it gave me I would say the following.

All 3 large rocks have selection lines around them in the dark areas and have been worked. The top right one the most and the bottom the least. The top right rock has lost all of its deffinition lines and now looks to be just a few colors. On therest of the photo there are some flat rocks, center and 9 Oclock that have been blurred in place the white shows swirls.
The bottom rock has a white section that went to 100% white, the only place on the print that large of that white. Maybe all of that white was altered a bit. Again missing deffinition.

Am I even close?
Deuem

Which image are You discussing...?

[deuem]

The Quick Fix




Deuem on the above



Close up




After you were done and all of the text I wrote above applies to this print




This photo shows me maybe even more than the white object.

I want to start out with: Any photos presented at our level should be of the best quality we can get. Taking sections of poor jpeg photos and then re-sizing them does not work. Also a direct link to the best original photo is needed to prove where you got it and that you did not change it or get it off another forum where they changed it and you don't know.

We end up in the same run around over and over. I know we went this way on the spaceship on the moon. Everyone was pushing it and I agree it looked that way but with the original it was not there it was just a play of light in the cheaper version.

The post should start with the original photo link, then a circled version then the work. Too many do spoil the thread. You can finish one then go to the next to keep readers interested or start multi threads. I don't even know what mission these are from. So if a judge called me in on this to testify I would have to decline on the grounds that I did not know where the shots came from and could have been worked before I got them.

Ok lets go with what we got for now.  The white area has no definition; it is basically flat and very white. Almost like a mirror. It does have characteristics that remind me of CGI Painting and some blending. It would normally be put in the W.T.Heck is this box. Something is wrong. When I looked at the photo the first time I only looked at the re-worked one Amy did and did not see the white glitch one.

In her photo I had no idea what to look for. Because of the quality this is hard to do. The reworked from Amy has the same tones as the surrounding area and is more or less blended in better, but I did not like it in the first run as the rock and labeled it the rock in the center. I did not like the larger brown ones either, plus one more white flat stone. To me they might have also been worked before Amy. The high definition is missing I think they have been colored over using a selection tool to grab only that area. I show a path around them which turned green. Like a selection path in PS.

Now maybe there were all sorts of crawling creatures on those rocks basking in the sun or maybe the transmission got screwed up and they were full of glitches and they went in and fixed them before we saw it. That I don't know. But I do think someone touched up this photo in a hurry just to get it out of the way.  I would like to see the best copy/original if we can get it.

We all know they go in and touch up photos, the real reason is why. Bugs and flowers or holes in data.

Deuem

[ArMaP]

The original photo is 0066MR0293063000E1_DXXX, from Curiosity, Sol 66.

This is the version I got from the PDS.




This is the adjusted version.



PS: sorry for the file size, I didn't have the time to make a smaller version for the post.

Edit: I forgot to say that the white object (and the "toy") are on the right bottom corner of the photo.

[deuem]

0066MR0293063000E1_DXXX, from Curiosity, Sol 66.

Found this pic
Mars Mobile - Nasa   marsmobile.jpl.nasa.gov/.../raw/?...0066MR0293063000E1_DXXX&s=6...?   This image was taken by Mastcam: Right (MAST_RIGHT) onboard NASA's Mars rover Curiosity on Sol 66 (2012-10-12 18:38:34 UTC). Image Credit: ...   Right Mast Camera    I must be on the wrong page, rover or planet.....Can't find the white object and my internet is so slow today, I can't see the photos you posted

[ArMaP]

Can you see this page?

PS: I changed the images on my previous post, now the images in the post are smaller JPG versions, click for the full size PNGs made from the images in the PDS.

[deuem]

This image was taken by Mastcam: Right (MAST_RIGHT) onboard NASA's Mars rover Curiosity on Sol 66
(2012-10-12 18:24:58 UTC).
Curiosity Sol 66 0066MR0293000000E2_DXXX posted picture with white area
(2012-10-12 18:24:58 UTC).
Curiosity Sol 66 0066MR0293000000E2_DXXX noted in reply and the one the search came back with, perfect match until you figure out the time codes. the 0066 number is only in the save file area, not in the photo area....
2012-10-12 18:38:34 UTC).

sems thet all have the same number, only the time stamp is changed. cost me 3 hours to figure out you only posted 1/2 of the link to the photo, thanks.......next time post a link. 
deuem

[Amaterasu]

Deuem,

The image (original one I posted with the white blob) I did give the pic link to twice.  ALL the images I am presenting in this thread are screen shots from a panorama image here:  http://www.gigapan.com/gigapans/117546/snapshots/315914

Except for the vids at the beginning, all the images I have offered are from that image and are screen shots I took.


ArMaP,

Given that there is at least one object in that image that shows evidence of intelligent manufacture - the "toy" (and look really closely at the "brick;" especially in the processed image, One can see brickwork within the larger rectangle!) - We must conclude one of two things:

1.  These are pictures of Earth and We are being duped

2.  There absolutely IS evidence that intelligent life existed at some time on Mars

Is there any other conclusion We can make?

[Elvis Hendrix]

[Amaterasu]

That GIF needs to loop, Elvis.  I missed much of it and had to refresh, as it stopped.

[Elvis Hendrix]

That GIF needs to loop, Elvis.  I missed much of it and had to refresh, as it stopped.

Hey Amy its looping for me. I didnt make it, I stole it like the naughty gif nicker that i am.

[Amaterasu]

I decided it must have been a glitch in My system - now it's looping.

[ArMaP]

This image was taken by Mastcam: Right (MAST_RIGHT) onboard NASA's Mars rover Curiosity on Sol 66
(2012-10-12 18:24:58 UTC).
Curiosity Sol 66 0066MR0293000000E2_DXXX posted picture with white area
(2012-10-12 18:24:58 UTC).
Curiosity Sol 66 0066MR0293000000E2_DXXX noted in reply and the one the search came back with, perfect match until you figure out the time codes. the 0066 number is only in the save file area, not in the photo area....
2012-10-12 18:38:34 UTC).

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean.

sems thet all have the same number, only the time stamp is changed. cost me 3 hours to figure out you only posted 1/2 of the link to the photo, thanks.......next time post a link.

Are you talking about what I posted? I posted the correct link.

But I did post the wrong image ID yesterday, sorry for that, the correct image ID is the one on the link, 0066MR0293044000E1_DXXX.

[ArMaP]

Given that there is at least one object in that image that shows evidence of intelligent manufacture - the "toy" (and look really closely at the "brick;" especially in the processed image, One can see brickwork within the larger rectangle!) - We must conclude one of two things:

You're assuming things, I never said that there's an object "that shows evidence of intelligent manufacture", I only said that I find it strange.

1.  These are pictures of Earth and We are being duped

I have seen several people saying that, but if that was the case, where are the clouds? We rarely see clouds in Photos from Mars, but when we do they are slightly different from those from Earth, and always of the same type.

2.  There absolutely IS evidence that intelligent life existed at some time on Mars

One strange object cannot seriously be considered evidence of intelligent life.

Is there any other conclusion We can make?

Yes, you shouldn't make conclusions based on wishful thinking but on facts. 

[deuem]

Maybe Aliens have been picking things up on Earth for countless years, looking them over and dumping the garbage on Mars on their way out of the system. They just want to look at our trash, not keep it.