Clementine images

[Elvis Hendrix]

Afternoon Armap.
So what is your take on the infamous Clementine images?



Cos im curious.

[starwarp2000]

Come on Elvis!
Everyone knows that the tiny Japanese guy inside the camera had his thumb over the lens 

[Elvis Hendrix]

Hey Star,
was that what Jim and phage came up with one evening in the bath together? lol,
I wouldnt be suprised.

[ArMaP]

Afternoon Armap.
So what is your take on the infamous Clementine images?



Cos im curious.

That (and the other images) are from the site that worked more or less like Google Earth, joining several images to make a mosaic of the area the user was asking for. The grey, fuzzy looking areas correspond to areas for which there was no image available at the time (or even now, I don't remember the details).

The real photos taken by Clementine were (and are) available in the PDS.

That problem was almost completely removed with the second version of the image viewer, I think today's version is version 3.

[rdunk]

That (and the other images) are from the site that worked more or less like Google Earth, joining several images to make a mosaic of the area the user was asking for. The grey, fuzzy looking areas correspond to areas for which there was no image available at the time (or even now, I don't remember the details).

The real photos taken by Clementine were (and are) available in the PDS.

That problem was almost completely removed with the second version of the image viewer, I think today's version is version 3.

Please reference just above for the image being discussed.

Re: the Clementine image - that tampering smudge is covering a very design specific object of some sort.

One can see that the black object is raised off the surface and one can see its bottom support on the right end.

An elongated shadow can be seen on the surface under the object.

One can also see the black left end of the object as it just extends slightly out of the smudge.

One can also see the a shadow on the surface, under the left end of the object.

Also note the spikey-toothed piece on or near the right end of the object, just out of the smudge. These spikes have sharp points, and we can see them clearly, even with the smudge.

One can also see something in/behind this smudge. as it rises slightly above the smudge.

Is there any wonder why the later versions of this pic deleted smudge and all??

As ArMaP said, "That problem was almost completely removed with the second version of the image viewer". ************the lack of truthfulness in some of what comes to us in the NASA photos is unbelievable!! This is not just a photo smudge(s). Too much object detail to rule out a specific object.

[ArMaP]

Is there any wonder why the later versions of this pic deleted smudge and all??

There is no later versions of that image, that image is taken from a viewer that works like Google Earth, using several photos to make a larger view, according to what the user selected.

That area is made up of dozens of Clementine photos.

As ArMaP said, "That problem was almost completely removed with the second version of the image viewer".

What we can see on that image is the result of a software bug, it's not one photo. The second version corrected the bug (trying to join two images separated by a "black hole" where an image should be), but some "ghosting" was still visible around the edges (if I'm not mistaken).

This is not just a photo smudge(s). Too much object detail to rule out a specific object.

That's right, it's not a photo smudge, as that is not a photo.

[rdunk]

Unbelievability continues without specific evidence! Just like with posting anomalies, one just cannot say stuff, and be accepted s truth. Show us the photo proof, and the errors were made, how the errors were "changed", and who we can contact to verify the facts.

[deuem]

Off the Deuem cuff: All I can remember about this photo is that it is a photo of photos tapped to a round moon. As the photos came in they had to apply them the old way, Tape. There are actual photos of this in the NASA archives if you wish to dig them up. At that time they did not have the pretty equipment to stich them together. By hand they made a moon globe map.

Now, one can either belive that or think that thing is as big as LA. up to you.

In the end, the main question was did the photo get changed,  "YES" reason is in question on this one. Hey, 3 versions, yea it changed, look into the why...And then believe either way you want.


Deuem

[ArMaP]

Unbelievability continues without specific evidence! Just like with posting anomalies, one just cannot say stuff, and be accepted s truth.

I thought you knew where the image came from and would know how things are today, but I guess I was wrong.

I was also wrong about the versions.
That image is from version 1.0 or 1.1 of the Clementine Lunar Image Browser. As that version is not online any more, it's not possible to show how it worked. That version was replaced with version 1.5, you can read here an explanation of how it worked. There's also a list of people that worked in the project

The important in that explanation is the "This multi-resolution feature is implemented using a wavelet compression technology, known as MrSID, developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory as part of the Sunrise Project", as it was (probably, I was not involved in the project) this compression of the parts without images that resulted in those blurred areas.
The above is my opinion, based on my own work with digital images and as a programmer, but it's just my opinion.

The Image Browser is now in version 2.0.

Show us the photo proof

How can I show photo proof of something that does not exist any more? Or are you talking about something else?

and the errors were made

You already posted the errors, those blurred areas.

how the errors were "changed"

The errors were not changed, the errors in software processing the requests from the online users were corrected, resulting in a normal (with "holes" where there aren't any images) view.

and who we can contact to verify the facts.

I suppose the page I posted above has the relevant information.

More information here.

Also, as I said before (and as they say at the bottom of this page, the original images were always available in CD-ROM for those that would want to buy them. When I first found about this some 8 years ago the images were also available on the PDS, here.
At first there was only the Experiment Data Record Image Archive, some years latter they added the Full Resolution Clementine UVVIS Digital Image Model, you can ask zorgon about that.

[ArMaP]

Off the Deuem cuff: All I can remember about this photo is that it is a photo of photos tapped to a round moon. As the photos came in they had to apply them the old way, Tape. There are actual photos of this in the NASA archives if you wish to dig them up. At that time they did not have the pretty equipment to stich them together. By hand they made a moon globe map.

Those were the Lunar Orbiter photos, not the Clementine photos.

Clementine was the first mission that used a digital camera.

[deuem]

Those were the Lunar Orbiter photos, not the Clementine photos.

Clementine was the first mission that used a digital camera.

Ok, off a mission or so, it is a glitch in the Deuem mental system. The matrix is off balance today....

This is going way off the Mars topic. I would think any touch up or remakes of photos here should be Mars related.. hummmm.

[rdunk]

Ok ArMaP, regarding this what you call a "blurred area"............what do you call the part of this blurred area that is not blurred?? What do you call that very visible piece, on the right end, with the 5 or 6 visible sharp points - ie it is not blurred, but rather is very clear??

No, there is an object behind and in the smudge, and reworking the photo to "eliminate the smudge" does not make for an acceptable answer for what happened to the object.

ArMaP, don't worry about this, as there is at present it seems no acceptable correct answer. The truth of these such matters will be out before long, even if it has to come from China.

[ArMaP]

Ok ArMaP, regarding this what you call a "blurred area"............what do you call the part of this blurred area that is not blurred?? What do you call that very visible piece, on the right end, with the 5 or 6 visible sharp points - ie it is not blurred, but rather is very clear??

That's part of the crater that was visible in the photo to the right of the blurred area, that original Clementine Image Browser used either the wrong or too much compression, you can see that whole image is full of blurred areas and sharp edges.

No, there is an object behind and in the smudge, and reworking the photo to "eliminate the smudge" does not make for an acceptable answer for what happened to the object.

Nobody said anything about reworking the photo, as that's not a photo, it's a mosaic made of several photos.

ArMaP, don't worry about this, as there is at present it seems no acceptable correct answer. The truth of these such matters will be out before long, even if it has to come from China.

I'm not worried.

PS: I also think this "detour" should be moved to a different thread.

[rdunk]

Fine - I am through with this anyway - a waste of time with no "real data" presented that gives any reason to believe that Skipper's report is not accurate.

[rdunk]

Said I was through on this but, why has this Moon anomaly post been moved to the Mars Anomalies Forum Board, rather than to the Moon Anomalies??