[Tom Bishop]

This is all I have to say to the "dust storm" concept.

Image 2:


Image 1:


Untouched Versions of the above:
Image 1: https://i.imgur.com/CTOnapE.jpg
Image 2: https://i.imgur.com/csaHZnX.jpg

Sources again:
Image 1: https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA16239
Image 2: https://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/PIA16174

[markjo]

This is all I have to say to the "dust storm" concept.

What do you have to say about the "different point of view" concept?  You do realize that it's quite obvious that the photos were not taken from the same spot, don't you?

[pj1]

There's sand-crests in both images, yes. What if I were to suggest that sand-crests in both images - but with the disappearance of a rock - prove the sandstorm theory?

[Tumeni]

Yes, Tom, but can you prove them to be the SAME sand crests? Of the same height?

You do realise the numbering implies your second photo was taken first, thus implying that the rocks were UNcovered by wind/storm, not covered...?

[JustPostingThis]

The discrepancy between photo's is simply an artefact of PIA239 being a composite image.

PIA16239 clearly states :-
On Sol 84 (Oct. 31, 2012), NASA's Curiosity rover used the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) to capture this set of 55 high-resolution images, which were stitched together to create this full-color self-portrait. 

The set of 55 images are here :-
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=84&camera=MAHLI

The missing rocks are here :-
https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/00084/mhli/0084MH0000710000100913E01_DXXX.jpg

Sorry, no NASA lies on this one.

[Bobby Shafto]

The discrepancy between photo's is simply an artefact of PIA239 being a composite image.

PIA16239 clearly states :-
On Sol 84 (Oct. 31, 2012), NASA's Curiosity rover used the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) to capture this set of 55 high-resolution images, which were stitched together to create this full-color self-portrait. 

The set of 55 images are here :-
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=84&camera=MAHLI

The missing rocks are here :-
https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/00084/mhli/0084MH0000710000100913E01_DXXX.jpg

Sorry, no NASA lies on this one.

I've been puzzling over this since Tom posted this topic. I was feeling a bit like Vinny Gambini in "My Cousin Vinny" trying to convince myself that it must be an illusion since I'm convinced of the authenticity of Mars Rover images.

But I couldn't see how anything other than image manipulation was responsible for those "discrepancies" Tom was pointing out. The notion that the sand had shifted wasn't jiving. And the varying perspectives weren't lining up to resolve it either.

I still need to sift through those raw images to understand how/why they were stitched together to leave out segments altogether. I'm guessing it was done to rectify straight lines and avoid panoramic distortion. Basically done to make the pictures look prettier.

Thanks, 1x hit-and-run poster JustPostingThis, for just posting this.

[Tom Bishop]

The discrepancy between photo's is simply an artefact of PIA239 being a composite image.

PIA16239 clearly states :-
On Sol 84 (Oct. 31, 2012), NASA's Curiosity rover used the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI) to capture this set of 55 high-resolution images, which were stitched together to create this full-color self-portrait. 

The set of 55 images are here :-
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=84&camera=MAHLI

The missing rocks are here :-
https://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl-raw-images/msss/00084/mhli/0084MH0000710000100913E01_DXXX.jpg

Sorry, no NASA lies on this one.

Here is that image flipped around:



It is showing the same scene as Image Number 2.

In Image 2, as seen earlier in the thread, they would have had to copy-paste, warp, and photoshop out the red outlined rocks to make what they want:



Result (Image 1):



It's not an "overlap" issue. The explanation is that NASA photoshopped the rocks around to make what they wanted to make. Case closed.

[Tumeni]

When you look at the full mosaic picture, it's not difficult to see the perspective 'stretch', with one wheel disproportionate to the others.



As I said, when you superimpose the border of one on the other (in red) and join up the significant features, you can also see the stretch marks....





(I used Tom's uploads with the green and yellow boxes)

The log rock is out of frame to the left.

[Tumeni]

It's not an "overlap" issue. The explanation is that NASA photoshopped the rocks around to make what they want to make. Case closed.

But what is your case? In order to photoshop something, you have to have source material. Are you casting doubt on the source?

[markjo]

It's not an "overlap" issue. The explanation is that NASA photoshopped the rocks around to make what they wanted to make. Case closed.

I hate to ask such an obviously stupid question, but why would anyone go to the bother of photoshopping rocks, especially such uninteresting rocks?

[Tom Bishop]

There was clearly something behind the rover that they were trying to hide.

The rover allegedly just stuck its arm out to a stationary position and took 55 photos that were stitched together side-by-side. This image manipulation is deliberate, and goes beyond a simple "overlap" error.

[Tumeni]

There was clearly something behind the rover that they were trying to hide.

Such as ... what?

The rover allegedly just stuck its arm out to a stationary position and took 55 photos that were stitched together side-by-side.

Can't be done from a stationary arm. The arm would have to move, surely?

[I_Thought_I_was_done]

This Tom Bishop guy has some comprehension issues.
Image PIA16174 is not photoshopped. It was taken with a different camera, the Mastcam.
Image PIA16239 is a composite of 55 images taken with the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI).

[markjo]

There was clearly something behind the rover that they were trying to hide.

The rover allegedly just stuck its arm out to a stationary position and took 55 photos that were stitched together side-by-side. This image manipulation is deliberate, and goes beyond a simple "overlap" error.

No, it stuck its arm out and took 55 pictures from a variety of positions and angles.  Or do all 55 of these pictures look like they were taken from a stationary position?
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=84&camera=MAHLI

[Tumeni]

Have you considered, Tom, that the person or persons assembling the composite simply made an error, over what is, after all, a small section of the whole?

Someone else tried the same approach as you in 2014, but clearly couldn't tell which rock was which. The green one is wrong.

[Tom Bishop]

There was clearly something behind the rover that they were trying to hide.

Such as ... what?

It could be a person. It could be a piece of supporting equipment for the project that they were using. It could be anything they were trying to hide.

This Tom Bishop guy has some comprehension issues.
Image PIA16174 is not photoshopped. It was taken with a different camera, the Mastcam.
Image PIA16239 is a composite of 55 images taken with the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI).

It is you who has reading comprehension issues. PIA16174 is Image 2 in the OP. I didn't say it was photoshopped. It was the different example. The image you showed from the 55 images is the same as Image 2 and was clearly photoshopped to end up in its final state. It is not an image overlap issue. They manipulated the rocks and scenery.

There was clearly something behind the rover that they were trying to hide.

The rover allegedly just stuck its arm out to a stationary position and took 55 photos that were stitched together side-by-side. This image manipulation is deliberate, and goes beyond a simple "overlap" error.

No, it stuck its arm out and took 55 pictures from a variety of positions and angles.  Or do all 55 of these pictures look like they were taken from a stationary position?
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=84&camera=MAHLI

NASA explains how they did it right here: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/news/msl20121211b.html

The robot stuck its arm out and then angled it to take pictures of the scene around it. It's not a bunch of pictures that they happened to make a selfie out of. It was a choreographed automated routine. NASA claims in the above link that they practiced the automated routine on the ground.

There is a video of the arm movement here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw4Y0jouKGc

The craft is not moving between locations, and the pictures are not taken from widely different spots that a selfie happened to be created from. The selfie arm is basically just rotating in the same general area for its automated mosaic.

They supposedly had the selfie method worked out in the lab:



Did NASA then need to go and photoshop things around the lab? No.

An automated choreographed routine to make a mosaic that requires one to go in afterwards and Photoshop rocks and scenery around? Funny.

The photoshopped rocks and scenery clearly suggests that there was something that needed to be hidden.

[One_Last_Time]

If there was something to hide it would be seen either in one of the 55 images used to create PIA16239 or in PIA16174 which was taken with a different camera.
If you wish you could create your own version of  PIA16239 by stitching together an image using the 55 separate images and could include anything photoshopped out of PIA16239.

[Tumeni]

Did NASA then need to go and photoshop things around the lab? No.

They had to do something to put the separate shots together. That's why this image has the raggy edges.

So, if you isolate the upper left area of the lab photo and enlarge it the way you did with the Mars one, what does that area look like?

[markjo]

There was clearly something behind the rover that they were trying to hide.

The rover allegedly just stuck its arm out to a stationary position and took 55 photos that were stitched together side-by-side. This image manipulation is deliberate, and goes beyond a simple "overlap" error.

No, it stuck its arm out and took 55 pictures from a variety of positions and angles.  Or do all 55 of these pictures look like they were taken from a stationary position?
https://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=84&camera=MAHLI

NASA explains how they did it right here: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/news/msl20121211b.html

The robot stuck its arm out and then angled it to take pictures of the scene around it. It's not a bunch of pictures that they happened to make a selfie out of. It was a choreographed automated routine. NASA claims in the above link that they practiced the automated routine on the ground.

There is a video of the arm movement here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw4Y0jouKGc

The craft is not moving between locations, and the pictures are not taken from widely different spots that a selfie happened to be created from. The selfie arm is basically just rotating in the same general area for its automated mosaic.

I didn't say that the rover moved, but it sure looks like the camera moved quite a bit, hence the "various positions and angles" remark.

They supposedly had the selfie method worked out in the lab:



Did NASA then need to go and photoshop things around the lab? No.

An automated choreographed routine to make a mosaic that requires one to go in afterwards and Photoshop rocks and scenery around? Funny.

They already had the rocks and scenery in the photos.  The only photoshopping they needed to do was to stitch everything together.  Or are you saying that rocks were added to the final mosaic that are missing from the original photos?

The photoshopped rocks and scenery clearly suggests that there was something that needed to be hidden.

Only to someone who doesn't understand some of the quirks of stitching together mosaics.

[Tom Bishop]

If there was something to hide it would be seen either in one of the 55 images used to create PIA16239 or in PIA16174 which was taken with a different camera.
If you wish you could create your own version of  PIA16239 by stitching together an image using the 55 separate images and could include anything photoshopped out of PIA16239.

What does it matter what camera Image 1 and 2 were taken with? The rocks and scenery was manipulated. Are you guys just pointing out irrelevant points as a defense now?

They had to do something to put the separate shots together. That's why this image has the raggy edges.

So, if you isolate the upper left area of the lab photo and enlarge it the way you did with the Mars one, what does that area look like?

Here is Image 1 again: https://i.imgur.com/6Nx80CB.jpg

Here is the full size Lab Selfie image: https://www.nasa.gov/images/content/713481main_pia16458b-full_full.jpg

I don't see any similar manipulated cloning, air brushing, or scenery changes to any of the items or textures. Do you?

They already had the rocks and scenery in the photos.  The only photoshopping they needed to do was to stitch everything together.  Or are you saying that rocks were added to the final mosaic that are missing from the original photos?

The photo from the 55 image is not merely stitched together. There are many areas and rocks that were manipulated. The scenery was manipulated.

Only to someone who doesn't understand some of the quirks of stitching together mosaics.

What quirks? This is an automated process. This can't be an innocent overlap issue. The scene changes in very odd, and very clearly deliberate ways that is beyond an innocent overlap of photos.