Alien Anomalies

goggog wrote:

---

ESP_017319_1785_RED.NOMAP.browse.jpg (изображение «JPEG», 2048x16344 пикселов) - Масштабированное (4%)

---

 

goggog wrote:

---

ESP_017319_1785_RED.NOMAP.browse.jpg (изображение «JPEG», 2048x16344 пикселов) - Масштабированное (4%)

---

 

Still I will tell that this error - an object detail, is small opening, anyway for me

Ещё скажу , что эта ошибка - деталь объекта,  является  маленьким  открытием , во всяком случае для меня 

Yes, those are very good goggog. Well done.

ESP_017319_1785_RED.NOMAP.browse.jpg (изображение «JPEG», 2048x16344 пикселов) - Масштабированное (4%)

Another example where the streak appears in 17385 but not in 17319:

 

 

This image was taken as a part of a stereo pair.  This means we can see if the line appears on the ground in the same spot in both images.

These are the two images comprising the pair:

http://www.uahirise.org/ESP_017319_1785

http://www.uahirise.org/ESP_017385_1785

The links to the NASA anaglyphs are at the bottom of those images.  This is a link to the smaller png anaglyph from NASA (if you have 3d glasses, you should take a look):

http://hirise-pds.lpl.arizona.edu/PDS/EXTRAS/ANAGLYPH/ESP/ORB_017300_017399/ESP_017385_1785_ESP_017319_1785/ESP_017385_1785_ESP_017319_1785_RED.browse.png

 

Now, here is a look at our main line - in a gif animation - wiggling back and forth between one image and the other:

 

 

 

We can see that the line is not on the ground - as it changes position between the two images.

It is interesting we are getting the same defect in each image of the pair, though.  Maybe that helps us determine the true nature of the defect.  Again, it would be nice if NASA commented on their image defects, so we could fully understand how it was made, and why the same streak occurred in nearly the same place in two separate images.  Is this the line where the smaller chunks fit together - where a data loss occurred or where the graphics program failed to fit them together neatly?

 

 

 

 

It is my opinion that the straight lines we see in report #201 are photgraphic defects or assembly defects from when they assembled the smaller chunks of images into a single larger image with their graphics software.

 

Link to report #201:

http://www.marsanomalyresearch.com/evidence-reports/2011/201/tube-or-artifact.htm

I have studied this phenomenon before - having first seen it in a video put up by newandromeda on youtube, in this video called Highways and Cities on Mars.

They do look a lot like highways.

newandromeda found similar straight lines in a separate nasa image located here:

http://hirise.lpl.arizona.edu/PSP_009314_1670

 

What I found in that image is exactly what I am finding in this image.  The straight lines are following exactly parrallel to the edges of the original photograph.  In the previous image we had more than one line running parallel through the image - and it would appear to start and stop through the landscape.

 

We see similar defects in other photographs from other missions- which all run parallel to either the vertical edges or the horizontal edges of the pictures.  I think this gives it away that these are image defects - as they run with the image edges -rather than any other phenomenon.  I just wish NASA would catalogue their image defects somewhere so that people would know what to expect.  I guess they don't like bringing to light defective workmanship as that makes them look bad.

 

By the way, I did find some interesting forms near these photgraphic defects when I studied the newandromeda image - just as Skipper suggested we would find in this image, when he suggested the lines were only a distraction for something likely more interesting (though I haven't studied this one completely from report 201).

 

 

 

 

I only mentioned it because the image I downloaded from the MAResarch website (5th of 9 images) had certain areas which looked as if they were black.

I did one of the standard analyses I do to my photos I am investigating, and it turned out that these areas are indeed black RGB(0,0,0). The program that I run colours these areas red - meaning that this area does not have any detail inside it (ie the RGB values of the pixels are zero not just a low value that appears black). If they are a low value and not zero, then the next stage for my investigation is to increase the value to see what is in the 'shadow'.

So, I wonder if the process you performed on the image has introduced some values that were not there at the start. Or.. as I said, maybe my program has not done this analysis of the pixels correctly.

It is not a Big Deal or a problem, but we want the actual data (as far as we can with a .jpg image). Obviously we are not using the .jp2 version of the image either which may actually have some detail in there.

does this help to show you what I mean?
There are areas in your image which I think should be pure black (marked in red colour in my image) 

 

qmantoo wrote:

---

goggog, I am afraid that I have a problem with this image. (the one with the two side-by-side above)

The reason is that when I download Skippers image with the arrows in it, there are areas of pure black RGB=(0,0,0) and in yours, there are no such areas. However much you lighten and sharpen, a pure black area does not bring out any detail. Could you look again at your processing and see if this is the same on the image you downloaded? Of course, it is possible that my processing is doing something funny and I am totally wrong about this, but if we both check it, then we can find out what has gone wrong with our processing of the image. Q

pureblack areas in red
 

 

---

 Well. But while there is no time. I will try later

Xenon wrote:

---

goggog,.... Thank you for working on the images, I don't know how you have done it but that is some amazing detective work, the image has now taken on a new dimension with your evidence, it now appears that the dark patch could be a junction of a tube system (I think Papa shown us a similar structure in his early lunar posts), I am simply stunned by the detail you have shown us, the "151" could be some sort of edit mark and only shows up as pixels in the images I downloaded. 

Full credit goes to you, but how did you manage to pull out so much detail? also can  you pull up more detail from the other images in report 201.

---

Xenon, thanks for a recognition

"also can  you pull up more detail from the other images in report 201."

I will try. But at first I want to understand with Sol 621 a theme

  ANONYMOUS ANOMALIES FROM GOGGOG - Alien Anomalies

There at me more than ten objects

Now about figure 151. I think that it is a simple set of casual signs in defect of a picture

Here simple processing in full

"Full credit goes to you, but how did you manage to pull out so much detail?"

Now also I do not remember sequence of a step of processing - likely intuitively , but we will understand

goggog,.... Thank you for working on the images, I don't know how you have done it but that is some amazing detective work, the image has now taken on a new dimension with your evidence, it now appears that the dark patch could be a junction of a tube system (I think Papa shown us a similar structure in his early lunar posts), I am simply stunned by the detail you have shown us, the "151" could be some sort of edit mark and only shows up as pixels in the images I downloaded. 

Full credit goes to you, but how did you manage to pull out so much detail? also can  you pull up more detail from the other images in report 201.

Here my result.