Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

djellison · 2005-03-09 03:14:41

Notice the sky colour?

Is it my imagination or is the sky a pale blue-gray? I know the text states there's less dust in the air, which might explain this, but could there be more to it?
(Conspiracy-theorists, adjust your metal helmets and take note! :;): )
Could NASA be trying to give us a more natural colour-rendering than the 'lurid red rock / salmon pink sky' we've been treated to over the years?
Is it possible NASA's paradigm shift is beginning to show?! ???
[< Edit > The blueish tinge is more apparent against the white background in Cindy's 'Spacedaily" link - so check it out. It loses something against the blue background here at New Mars.]

You're joking right?

That image is made from the RAW JPg's at the JPL website - which are stretched, and uncalibrated. It is not a nasa image release.

It looks blue in images made from the raw JPGs because the auto-stretch algorythm used to show the most detail from each image will render blue images much lighter than they actually are when calibrated. The issue isnt up for debate I'm afraid - properly calibrated, published and peer reviewed data demonstrates what colour the sky actually is.

That is using properly calibrated RAD files published via the PDS.

If you do auto-levels on it, i.e. stretch it so that there is at least one white pixel on each channel and one black pixel on each channel, you get..

Now really - which is more likely - that purely by chance, images taken on mars thru red, green AND blue filters have exactly the same max and min brightness values in every single image taken of EVERYTHING ( as that what claiming that image is 'trye colour' is to suggest ) - or that actually - properly calibrated, peer reviewed raw data generates something perhaps a little more accurate?

Doug

hubricide · 2005-03-09 03:40:50

Aww.

djellison · 2005-03-09 04:08:50

Theres plenty of sites that demonstrate what colour Mar is using SCIENCE - and unfortunately plenty that go "THE FIRST PICTURE WAS BLUE AND EVERYTHING SINCE HAS BEEN A COVER UP"

Hoagland, imho, is the worst of these and should be shot for being an intelectual terrorist.

Doug

Shaun Barrett · 2005-03-09 04:50:31

Hubricide:-

Does it really matter what color the sky is, though, in the end?

A whole generation has grown up thinking Mars is lurid red with an ominous-looking ruddy pink sky .. alien and forbidding. Check out the scenery in the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, "Total Recall" - it's colours are completely ridiculous but they're now part of the popular visualization of Mars. This misrepresentation, although unintentional and connected with the use of infra-red filters standing in for red filters etc., is unfortunate.
Many of us here have mourned the lack of sufficient public interest in human Mars exploration. That lack of a sufficiently large groundswell of popular support allows politicians the luxury of effectively ignoring crewed expeditions to Mars; allowing them to postone such trips until decades in the future. They get to pass the buck on to future politicians and feed us platitudes rather than action.
I believe the fact that Mars is portrayed as so alien and uninviting in appearance contributes to the feeling that looking for a new world to colonize is futile - that Mars is just too "different" ever to be a new Earth. For this reason I think, images closer to the reality which would be perceived by a human observer on the planet's surface should be given a higher priority - if only for PR purposes.

The December issue of 'Discover" magazine had an interesting article regarding this very problem with colour rendering on Mars:-

To make a true-color image, the cameras [used on the recent Mars rovers and orbiters] must take three separate images of the same scene, each through a different primary color filter: red, green, and blue. When all three are put together they can render a true-color composite. Even then, balancing the colors so they closely match what the eye would see has to take into account the effects of dust, changing light levels, and other variables.
Ironically, NASA's dedication to the needs of the scientific community may have encouraged the release of the miscolored Mars images. The Spirit and Opportunity rover cameras have two "eyes" each with eight color filters. The left eye includes the red, green, and blue color filters: the right is dedicated entirely to ultraviolet and infrared. Planetary geologists rely on ultraviolet and infrared data to identify rocks and minerals - the primary scientific goal of the current Mars rover mission - so mission planners try to use those filters as often as possible. Any time they add invisible wavelengths into the mix, however, they necessarily get a false-color image.
Most of the red Mars images resulted from using filters out of the range of human vision. Even recent rover panoramas and close-ups labeled "approximate true color" are made with infrared filters standing in for red. Oliver de Goursac, an imaging technician on the Viking lander mission, argues that the glut of phony colors is easily avoidable. "NASA's rovers have the capability fro true-color imaging with the left camera eye, but they simply choose to use the L2 filter (infrared) as their red and the L7 filter (near ultraviolet) for their blue", he says. "They do this because they want to maximize the data stream by sending back to Earth images that can be readily used for stereo imaging with the widest possible range in the spectrum."
Using infrared and ultraviolet filters in both of the rover's eyes allows the imaging team to create three-dimensional panoramas which are important for guiding the rovers over uneven Martian terrain. Such panoramas are geologically meaningful at the same time. True-color imaging gets much less attention. "The priority is to obtain the stereo coverage so that NASA can have the most accurate information for driving the rovers and making mechanical-arm placement decisions", Bell says. [Jim Bell is lead scientist of the Mars Exploration rover panoramic camera and part of the Hubble team for the Mars imaging project since 1996.] "One of my important goals was to try to present the planet in as natural a view as possible. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues do not share this desire for accurate color renderings, and so sometimes planetary images can get quite garish, with no explanation of what is being shown."

This indicates the reason for the unrealistic views of the Martian surface and it's a very reasonable reason!
But I think NASA needs to give us the 'real deal' and show the dirt as browny-red instead of blood-red, and the sky as varying from pink to yellowish to whiteish to bluey-gray, as it actually would appear to an astronaut .. or a colonist.

Cindy:-

Nice to have you back with us, Shaun. I hope you're feeling better.

Thanks.

Palomar · 2005-03-09 06:37:19

Many of us here have mourned the lack of sufficient public interest

*Or the seeming lack of sufficient interest on the part of scientists (of whatever speciality/discipline). Seems it's just us "poor ignorant plebs" posting about the science discoveries, the machines making them possible in the first place, etc., in these threads for some time now. I just love being a "middle person": Most people don't care/aren't interested and the scientists who COULD chime in a bit more are "too good" to talk to "lowly us," I suppose. :laugh:

But I think NASA needs to give us the 'real deal' and show the dirt as browny-red instead of blood-red, and the sky as varying from pink to yellowish to whiteish to bluey-gray, as it actually would appear to an astronaut .. or a colonist.

Yeah! I'm placing my bets that the sky on Mars is actually periwinkle in color. And dusky purple at twilight.

--Cindy

djellison · 2005-03-09 09:04:15

But I think NASA needs to give us the 'real deal' and show the dirt as browny-red instead of blood-red, and the sky as varying from pink to yellowish to whiteish to bluey-gray, as it actually would appear to an astronaut .. or a colonist.

They already are. Go and do the science yourself - get to the PDS MER Workbook, get the raw data and make the images yourself like I did just there. It's not hard - infact it's very easy indeed. If you're disagreeing with those colour - then you're aledging an enormous conspiracy dealing with hundreds of scientists both within nasa, and outside nasa - a concept no more valid than suggesting we never walked on the moon. It's that clear.

No one suggests mars is 'blood red' - no one hassaid "here's a true colour picture of mars - and it's bood red"

Butterscotch - thats all it's about.

Mars is that colour. Thats how it is. The greatest brightest minds in the world have studied this and come up with the same answer.

There is no cover up. There is no tweaking, adjusting, fixing, tinting. To suggest there is is beyond ignorant.

Jim's a damn good chap and at can be made. Perhaps when MASTCam gets to mars with MSl - the colour imager there will perhaps halt a little of the nonsense - but i doubt it.

Sorry to sound a bit ranty and offensive about this - but things like this REALLY annoy me. There's a lot of things that NASA does wrong - very wrong - but making false claims about the colour of mars is NOT one of them.

Doug

No life on Mars · 2005-03-09 11:48:17

Hej djelison
Can you post one link where we can see what are true colors of Martian sky.

Almir · 2005-03-09 11:57:48

Hej djelison
Can you post one link where we can see what are true colors of Martian sky.

Sky Color
http://calspace.ucsd.edu/marsnow/librar … ...r1.html

The Color of Mars
http://mars-news.de]http://mars-news.der/blue.html.en

djellison · 2005-03-09 14:08:56

Hej djelison
Can you post one link where we can see what are true colors of Martian sky.

I've already shown you a picture that shows just that a few posts up

Either you choose to believe me - or not. Either you sign up to the conspiracists - or not. Your call.

Doug

hubricide · 2005-03-09 16:27:20

A whole generation has grown up thinking Mars is lurid red with an ominous-looking ruddy pink sky .. alien and forbidding. Check out the scenery in the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie, "Total Recall" - it's colours are completely ridiculous but they're now part of the popular visualization of Mars. This misrepresentation, although unintentional and connected with the use of infra-red filters standing in for red filters etc., is unfortunate.
Many of us here have mourned the lack of sufficient public interest in human Mars exploration. That lack of a sufficiently large groundswell of popular support allows politicians the luxury of effectively ignoring crewed expeditions to Mars; allowing them to postone such trips until decades in the future. They get to pass the buck on to future politicians and feed us platitudes rather than action.
I believe the fact that Mars is portrayed as so alien and uninviting in appearance contributes to the feeling that looking for a new world to colonize is futile - that Mars is just too "different" ever to be a new Earth. For this reason I think, images closer to the reality which would be perceived by a human observer on the planet's surface should be given a higher priority - if only for PR purposes.

Mars is much different from Earth, though. Clearly, people can live on Mars, but they won't be walking around with just a shirt and pants on and admiring the flowers and butterflies.. at least not for a while.

The best part of Total Recall (besides CONSIDAH DIS A DIV-AHS) is the eyes bugging out when Arnie and his gal pal are laying around on the surface of Mars. Oh yeah, and Quatto, that guy who lived in the other guy's belly.

Stephen · 2005-03-09 19:30:46

Is that white ring that can be seen in the distance in the image below (from Sol 398) the Vostok "crater"?

(There are much closer images for Sol 399. For example, http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … R.JPG]this one.)

Palomar · 2005-03-09 21:14:45

*Wow, what a fabulous photo. All those ripples, ripples...

Stopped to realize again: No human foot has ever pressed itself anywhere on that entire planet.

--Cindy

Shaun Barrett · 2005-03-09 21:16:36

Hi Doug!
Boy oh boy ... you sure get hot under the collar pretty easily, don't you?! And, in this case, if you were to examine carefully the quote from 'Discover" magazine I posted, you'd see that I'm not espousing conspiracy theories at all. Your fervent and indignant defence of NASA, which would be highly commendable in the face of an actual conspiracy accusation, is entirely misplaced on this occasion.

The essence of my point was to indicate that many of the images from Mars aren't designed to impress the masses, like postcards from the Rocky Mountains or something. I've quoted imaging experts who explain why so many of the pictures from Mars DO NOT represent what a human being would perceive on the surface.
This is not ME challenging the experts you rush to defend. This isn't a conspiracy theory I've dreamed up between doses of medication. This is just a matter of fact.

You seem to have overlooked the fact that I said: "This misrepresentation, although unintentional .. ".
You point out that Jim Bell's a "damn good chap", as though I've attacked him or impugned his good name - when there is no such implication in anything I've said. All I've done is quote something HE HIMSELF SAID: "One of my important goals was to try to present the planet in as natural a view as possible. Unfortunately, some of my colleagues do not share this desire for accurate color renderings, and so sometimes planetary images can get quite garish, with no explanation of what is being shown."

You say: "No one suggests mars is 'blood red' - no one hassaid "here's a true colour picture of mars - and it's bood red"
I agree. I know of nothing in the literature I've read that states categorically that a lurid blood-red Mars is the 'true colour' rendition. And, in certain lighting conditions, particularly during the quite common episodes of raised dust that occur, there's little doubt Mars IS very red-looking and the skies dusky orange. (I've lived through enough dust storms in outback Australia to know firsthand what they look like, too.)
But, on very many other occasions, when there's little or no raised dust, the use of certain filters by the lander scientists makes the surface look that way anyhow. I don't assert this .. I don't have to. NASA IMAGING SCIENTISTS like Oliver de Goursac and Jim Bell are on record as saying it and I've quoted their words.

Where I do veer off into an opinion of my own (and please excuse my audacity in daring to express any sort of opinion at all about this stuff - because I am ignorant and unworthy! ) is in commenting on the POPULAR NOTION of how Mars looks on the surface. However this popular notion came to be, it is now heavily skewed toward the "lurid red" end of the spectrum and this is plainly evident in sci-fi movies like "Total Recall".
This, at least to me, is BAD PR!
We need to encourage and coax public opinion in favour of manned Mars exploration; that's what the Mars Society is all about. The more Mars is portrayed as Earth-like, the better chance we have of doing that.

It appears to me, and to the likes of NASA's de Goursac (with his quote about "the glut of phony colors") and Jim Bell (a 'damn good chap" - no argument there), that too much negatively alien imagery has made its way into the popular imagination for the reasons cited.

Doug:-

Sorry to sound a bit ranty and offensive about this -

Hmmm, yeah. I don't really understand the rationale for your tirade in this instance (and I think you should get your blood pressure checked now and then) but I accept your apology.

Palomar · 2005-03-09 21:50:28

*Pearly-tan with orange highlights. That's what I expect Mars' sky looks like from mid-morning to mid-afternoon.

We have seen at least one photo of a bluish (very bluish) Marsian sunset...and that photo was "true color" according to the caption. It's long-since buried in S & O #4 or thereabouts.

--Cindy

MacAndrew · 2005-03-10 01:27:25

Hoagland, imho, is the worst of these and should be shot for being an intelectual terrorist.

Shot? Why not burned at the stake?

Though I am aware it may amaze some, Mr. Hoagland has the same right to his - admittedly very questionable - opinions about Mars as anybody else.

Saying that one should be shot for thinking that the "face on Mars" is a real artifact etc. does not strike me as very "scientific" (and no, I don't think it's a real artifact).

About the colours of Mars - I have yet to understand why this subject seems to be considered "taboo" by somebody. By now, I have read hundreds of documents about it and, as a net result, I am sure of only one thing - namely, that I would have to go to Mars myself to get any realistic idea of its colours.

MacAndrew

hubricide · 2005-03-10 05:46:19

It's hard to believe that Hoagland isn't merely trying to drum up money when he's adamantly stated time and time again that the moon is surrounded by a 'crystal cathedral', which the Apollo landers weaved their way through as they touched down on the surface and then again on the way back up. And oh yeah, NASA is hiding this amazing revelation because of uh, some reason, or another, and he has only three or four over-processed photographs as 'proof'.

It's possible that he's merely completely insane, but I must admit I am more cynical and that I lean towards the 'let's get the truly insane people to send me money' explanation.. I suppose it's possible that his impossible claims have inspired peoples' imaginations, and maybe that offsets whatever harm he's done to those who do try to put forth more plausible but still unpopular theories, but personally the guy strikes me as a complete fraud and I wouldn't mind if he got hit a bus and died instantly.

But yeah, Spirit and Opportunity..

djellison · 2005-03-10 07:12:39

It's hard to believe that Hoagland isn't merely trying to drum up money when he's adamantly stated time and time again that the moon is surrounded by a 'crystal cathedral', which the Apollo landers weaved their way through as they touched down on the surface and then again on the way back up.

Oh - and Mimas is a discarded spacecraft you know.

He's sick, twisted, vile, and a disgrace.

Doug

Shaun Barrett · 2005-03-10 07:22:52

Hubricide:-

It's possible that he's merely completely insane, but I must admit I am more cynical and that I lean towards the 'let's get the truly insane people to send me money' explanation..

:laugh: Ha-ha!! I think you're almost certainly right - he's a showman.
I can see Doug's point of view, though, in as much as Hoagland's stuff, while often amusing to those in a position to discriminate fact from fantasy, is likely to hoodwink those lacking the education or common sense to discern the difference. In that regard, Hoagland is 'dangerous' because his 'celebrity' status allows him to disseminate insupportable hypotheses as facts, which undermines the efforts of real scientists.
On the other hand, I believe we need always to allow some room for 'mavericks' at the edges of the scientific edifice. Their very 'otherness' allows them to think outside the square and pursue ideas 'respectable' scientists dare not touch for fear of ridicule or even ostracism.
I admit it may be stretching credulity, though, even to allow Hoagland membership of the mavericks' club; he may only qualify for the frauds' club!

MacAndrew:-

About the colours of Mars - I have yet to understand why this subject seems to be considered "taboo" by somebody. By now, I have read hundreds of documents about it and, as a net result, I am sure of only one thing - namely, that I would have to go to Mars myself to get any realistic idea of its colours.

I think that's very fair comment .. when do we leave?!
Welcome to New Mars, Mac!

REB · 2005-03-10 07:53:21

Looks like Opportunity is at http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/ … tml]Vostok

Palomar · 2005-03-12 15:17:51

*Yesterday's announcement of Spirit getting run over by a dust devil was posted in the "MER search for dust devils" thread here in the Unmanned Probes folder.

For posterity's sake, I think this article should be included here:

Gusev]http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/spirit_dust_050312.html]"Gusev Alive with Devils"

MER scientists were noticing Spirit wheel tracks were disappearing; "onboard cameras could look down and see the tracks vanishing." That aroused their suspicions.

Turns out that a martian whirlwind – dubbed a dust devil – likely zoomed over the robot high up in the Columbia Hills. That fleeting flyby effectively cleaned Spirit’s solar arrays, giving the robot a new lease on life.
Engineers report that the rover’s power reading quickly shot up to almost as high as when the rover landed on Mars over a year ago.

Yay!

Spirit has been busy wrapping up a spectacular panorama from the vantage point of "Larry’s Lookout."
--Miracle cleaning event--
Earlier this month, lead investigator for the Mars Exploration Rover mission, Steve Squyres of Cornell University, noted that Spirit’s depleted power was reducing the number of hours per day available to snap photos.

Now Spirit can snap photos to its little heart's content. :up:

--Cindy

P.S.: Does anyone care to tackle figuring out the mathematical odds of a dust devil running over one of the MERs? Or has that been figured out elsewhere (web site, whatever) and I missed it? (I'd try for those odds calculations myself...but math isn't my thing...ahem)

Too bad this didn't happen around Christmas time; we could have rewritten Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer to Spirit Got Run over by a Dust Devil :laugh:

Shaun Barrett · 2005-03-12 19:57:14

This is fantastic .. I just can't believe our good fortune!
Spirit's had a spring-clean. :band:

As some of you may recall, I disputed the dust problem with Doug a while back - mainly because I wasn't convinced Spirit was really as dusty as all that, until unequivocal photographic evidence later persuaded me otherwise.

But now I believe in the dust problem and I'm a "born-again dust-devil enthusiast"!!
Anything that's going to keep those solar panels squeaky clean is O.K. by me. :up:
[ Mind you, I think I preferred that team of young ladies in cowboy hats ... :laugh: ]

By the way, the following excerpt, taken from Cindy's link:-

Images of the panels taken later showed "beautiful dark panels," Crumpler explained. "And all the wires and edges on the [rover] deck have little dust tails. I think it might have been the Martian squeegee men. Either that or one heck of a buffeting by a dust devil," he said.

... seems to indicate that Spirit was hit by quite a strong dust-devil. There've been various papers and articles published in recent years suggesting that dust-devils might produce strong electrical discharges, possibly powerful enough to damage electrical circuitry in our landers.
Has anyone heard anything about problems with the electrics on either of the MERs?
If not, is it safe to assume that the hypotheses about dangerous static electricity associated with dust-devils can now be discounted? ???

Palomar · 2005-03-12 20:35:58

There've been various papers and articles published in recent years suggesting that dust-devils might produce strong electrical discharges, possibly powerful enough to damage electrical circuitry in our landers.
Has anyone heard anything about problems with the electrics on either of the MERs?
If not, is it safe to assume that the hypotheses about dangerous static electricity associated with dust-devils can now be discounted? ???

*That is a really good question. And especially as dust devil activity in Spirit's vicinity has apparently been rather high recently.

There should be indications at least, no?

--Cindy

Rxke · 2005-03-13 03:43:38

They caught a devil in the act, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7119148/#050311a]MSNBC has the story. Complete with 'animation'

atomoid · 2005-03-13 16:03:30

...so why didnt Spirit get zapped by that dust devil? well, unless it did get zapped but it wasnt serious and we didnt hear much about it, it could be that maybe since theres no real humidity in the air or soil to facilitate such shorting, maybe even Spirit, even though it has aluminum wheels, is essentially electrically insulated, or maybe i just dont know what im talking about... can anyone striaghten this out?

SpaceNut · 2005-03-14 06:39:09

Now let the solar power increase as it was noted before as a possibly as to why the other rovers energy levels where much higher. Or have I got that wrong for which rover had been suspected of getting a spring cleaning before? ???

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2005-03-09 03:14:41

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#27 2005-03-09 03:40:50

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#28 2005-03-09 04:08:50

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#29 2005-03-09 04:50:31

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#30 2005-03-09 06:37:19

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#31 2005-03-09 09:04:15

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#32 2005-03-09 11:48:17

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#33 2005-03-09 11:57:48

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#34 2005-03-09 14:08:56

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#35 2005-03-09 16:27:20

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#36 2005-03-09 19:30:46

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#37 2005-03-09 21:14:45

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#38 2005-03-09 21:16:36

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#39 2005-03-09 21:50:28

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#40 2005-03-10 01:27:25

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#41 2005-03-10 05:46:19

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#42 2005-03-10 07:12:39

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#43 2005-03-10 07:22:52

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#44 2005-03-10 07:53:21

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#45 2005-03-12 15:17:51

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#46 2005-03-12 19:57:14

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#47 2005-03-12 20:35:58

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#48 2005-03-13 03:43:38

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#49 2005-03-13 16:03:30

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

#50 2005-03-14 06:39:09

Re: Mars Exploration Rovers (MER)

Board footer