Yes, I agree. The older images do seem to have less messing done and appear to me to be sharper. Having said that, they may also be at a lower resolution too so it maybe swings-and-roundabouts. I too think they have a policy of going through the old pictures and re-sampling/re-compressing them at the new reduced value.
Nighthawk - come back to us on this thread. No-one here wants to score points to prove we are better than anyone else. We all are looking for the same thing, just in different ways.
Although, I dont think we will ever convince a true skeptic with any evidence we fiind and post here.
Just a thought on what Q stated. I believe that older images that have not been modified in the manner that newer ones have might provide more data to support our theories. As of now the state of the data from older orbiters and rovers is unknown. To clarify this, it is unknown to what degree Nasa or Jpl has reviewed image data to clean it up, except maybe the case of the 1.5 to 2.0 version Naval lunar mapping project viewer. (Clementine)
The image is breaking up into block pixels which makes it difficult to determine what is real and what is just blocky pixel.
What I do is to turn off 'pixel smoothing' in my image viewer, this show the pixels as squares and that way it is obvious if I zoom in too far because the image breaks up. Unfortunately, NASA knows the limit of when an anomaly is a 'maybe' and when it is a definite and they often do not allow us to see enough to get exited about a find..
I have no doubt that Hale crater contains many anomalies (covered by skippers report #084 ), as members know I have reservations about filtering images to show detail as the original anomaly can be filtered out or become something different, but your image does show some interesting features.
By the way nighthark you have posted in the wrong category and I will be moving this thread to Lunar and ISS Anomalies
__________________
"Creating a fiction when stating a fact destroys the credibility of the truth one are trying to convey"