a martian oddbox

[funbox]

Why do you say that?

because the lens flare is giving an impression of a sun that's ten times the size in the sky , as if we were standing on Venus observing.

funbox

[ArMaP]

If you know that's a lens flare why even post it?

[funbox]

because certitude is a luxury I don't possess. are you that certain it is ?

funbox

[ArMaP]

because certitude is a luxury I don't possess. are you that certain it is ?

I cannot be certain of any thing, but you see a photo from a place that looks like Mars, on a site about a Mars mission, and say "so this is venus then". That looks like a certainty, not a question or a doubt.

[thorfourwinds]

Just to throw a little gasoline on the fire...







Where On Earth Are NASA's Rovers Sending Pictures From? Devon Island, Canada | Humans Are Free

[funbox]

I cannot be certain of any thing, but you see a photo from a place that looks like Mars, on a site about a Mars mission, and say "so this is venus then". That looks like a certainty, not a question or a doubt.

so.. you think this is not a question then.. good for you
but excluding the absence of squiggly lines and a dot, how does the atmosphere bl;oom so much without , er , an atmosphere .. I don't see the sun bloom that much on earth and we supposed to have a thicker atmosphere

to me it doesn't add up , do you have the answers, I cant say I've seen such a massive falloff in bloom *especially the top* so much so its like light hit a wall , not from the navs or the masts

have you ?

funbox

[funbox]

Just to throw a little gasoline on the fire...







Where On Earth Are NASA's Rovers Sending Pictures From? Devon Island, Canada | Humans Are Free

gasoline ? isn't thor supposed to smite with hammer and lightning ? is this New 21st century Thor? does this make Marvel partially responsible for global Altering ?is this animal what sparked the rumour that the rover was situated somewhere off Iceland or that general region ? will these question ever end?

???Box

[ArMaP]

but excluding the absence of squiggly lines and a dot, how does the atmosphere bl;oom so much without , er , an atmosphere ..

Mars has an atmosphere, and lens flare has no relation with atmosphere, that's why it's called "lens flare" and not "atmosphere flare".

I don't see the sun bloom that much on earth and we supposed to have a thicker atmosphere

That's probably because you don't look for them or ignore them when you see them. Also, as that's an unwanted effect, people usually do not publish those photos.

to me it doesn't add up , do you have the answers, I cant say I've seen such a massive falloff in bloom *especially the top* so much so its like light hit a wall , not from the navs or the masts

have you ?

It's nothing special.

I know it's not exactly the same, but look at these two photos.




Both were taken with the same camera, with just a couple of minutes between them. You can see that in the photo that has the Sun in the centre, the Sun doesn't appear as big as the in the other photo, in which the Sun is just appearing on the image. The different position of the Sun in both photos is the reason for the difference in brightness, as the camera tried to adjust the to the conditions of the whole image, so it used a faster shutter speed (or a lower sensitivity) in the photo with the Sun in the centre. As it used a slower speed (or a higher sensitivity) in the other photo, that photo suffers more from excessive light, making the Sun look bigger.

[Eighthman]

http://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/2015/08/nasa-posts-fake-mars-photo-as-real.html

These shots are making the rounds on the 'net, perhaps from a site in Spanish. If true, the duplication is the interesting part. Are they hiding something?

It continues to be my speculation that the Western Political Elite could be facing a desperate sort of time limit. If NASA is hiding blatant evidence of ET life on the Moon or Mars, then Russia/China/India/the EU could blow the whole scam wide open with a space probe and a show of the middle finger to the US government.

[ArMaP]

http://www.ufosightingsdaily.com/2015/08/nasa-posts-fake-mars-photo-as-real.html

These shots are making the rounds on the 'net, perhaps from a site in Spanish. If true, the duplication is the interesting part. Are they hiding something?

The duplication is probably a result of creating the panorama, some programs repeat part of the image to fill the empty space.

People should never look at a panorama as if it was a single photo.

Edited to add that, in this case, the repeated rocks appear because of the camera used. That panorama was made with photos from the camera used to take photos of the ground and of the rocks close to the rover, so it has a different lens, and that lens distorts slightly the scene, so when joining two photos one next to the other, the background appears "squashed", as if the field of view of the background was smaller than the field of view of the foreground, so the same objects on the background appear in different photos.

Once more, knowing about photography when discussing photography is a good idea.

[funbox]

Mars has an atmosphere, and lens flare has no relation with atmosphere, that's why it's called "lens flare" and not "atmosphere flare".

who mentioned lensflare there are two little circles in the photos you can see, the bloom you've illustrated in the photos you present but note the proportions to the size of the suns disc ..

do you see the same in the Martian photo's ?

maybe you misunderstand me because I talk from the metalanguage of a 3d animator
https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Rendering/LightingAndShadows/LightShafts/index.html#bloommethod

That's probably because you don't look for them or ignore them when you see them. Also, as that's an unwanted effect, people usually do not publish those photos.

no, I see.. tis needed to reproduce such effects in 3d environments

It's nothing special.

yet it still looks disproportionately large in comparison to the known size of the suns disc in the Martian sky



funbox

[Eighthman]

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/01144/mcam/1144ML0051850900501577E01_DXXX.jpg

Thank you for clearing up the pitfalls of the panoramic photos.  Are we saying that the circular 'barnacles' above are merely a JPEG artifact? Or are they real?  I wasn't clear if earlier explanations touched these.

[ArMaP]

who mentioned lensflare

You did, here. 

because the lens flare is giving an impression of a sun that's ten times the size in the sky

do you see the same in the Martian photo's ?

Not exactly the same, that's why I said "I know it's not exactly the same". 
I was expecting that you were able to look at my photos and understand what I meant.

maybe you misunderstand me because I talk from the metalanguage of a 3d animator
https://docs.unrealengine.com/latest/INT/Engine/Rendering/LightingAndShadows/LightShafts/index.html#bloommethod

I misunderstood you because you started talking about lens flare and then changed to bloom, it would be easier if you didn't change the words in the middle of the discussion.

no, I see.. tis needed to reproduce such effects in 3d environments

Forget artificial images, we are talking about photography, not about computer generated images.

yet it still looks disproportionately large in comparison to the known size of the suns disc in the Martian sky

Different cameras, different results...

[funbox]

You did, here. 

you do realise that bloom is used to describe the radial light scattering that is caused by the sun shining through atmosphere and isn't dependant on there being a lens to capture it, even one attached to the eye ... secondary rings and circles are the things that are reflections within the camera

I used lensflare as a catchall for you..
but a lens flare is made up of many components

Not exactly the same, that's why I said "I know it's not exactly the same". 
I was expecting that you were able to look at my photos and understand what I meant.

your expectations where met.. disappointment on your part is unnecessary

I misunderstood you because you started talking about lens flare and then changed to bloom, it would be easier if you didn't change the words in the middle of the discussion.

you misunderstood me because you was unaware of the multifaceted nature of a lensflare

Different cameras, different results...

indeed , later when time permits and I'm not recreating a fireworks display
ill recreate lensflare from all of the lenses on the rover.. will be interesting to see how much atmosphere I have to create to get an identical scattering

but please don't tell me the look is down to the camera alone .. atmosphere plays an important part

take light pillars we see from the sun and ground light sources..
ice crystals play a part in there creation .. hazy cloud can create help create some massive blooms..

how can you say the camera is the culprit alone ? *query*

funbox

[funbox]

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/01144/mcam/1144ML0051850900501577E01_DXXX.jpg

Thank you for clearing up the pitfalls of the panoramic photos.  Are we saying that the circular 'barnacles' above are merely a JPEG artifact? Or are they real?  I wasn't clear if earlier explanations touched these.

they're geometric shapes , that rock is so close to the camera , we have a at least 400 % of zoomy goodness to be able to make out definition.

what they are , well, not worthy enough to take a close up of .. obtuse of Nasa?

funbox