Mars in True Color (almost)

Trien · Post #1by **Trien** » 18.11.2003, 02:11

*delurks*

Anybody take note of this here?

http://themis.asu.edu/zoom-20031114a.html

It looks like it's just the one image for now (hopefully we'll see more), but perhaps of interest to those trying to color-balance their textures.

Darkmiss · Post #2by **Darkmiss** » 18.11.2003, 10:49

WoW doesn't that surface image just look amazing

I hope they release more

JackHiggins · Post #3by **JackHiggins** » 18.11.2003, 21:14

Incredible detail- and the sunlit parts are much yellower than I would have imagined!!

DJ_Night · Post #4by **DJ_Night** » 18.11.2003, 22:53

Greetings. hehe back in the 60s we called it the "RED Planet", I guess not anymore, its much yellower with orange cast.

Beutiful and wel detailed image, looks stunning. hopefully they will release more images from the same source.

Now I?ll have 2 recolor the Mars texture so it matches this one, mine is way red.

thanks for sharing, cheers.

fsgregs · Post #5by **fsgregs** » 18.11.2003, 23:11

OK, I'm confused for real now. What I don't understand is how every new source can be wrong or right on this! A few months ago, Hubble shots from the space telescope showed a Mars that was much redder than this. The photos are posted on the forum somewhere. That too claimed that the shot was "true color"

:roll:

Frank

bh · Post #6by bh » 19.11.2003, 00:53

Where's Fridger?!!

regards...bh.

Paul · Post #7by **Paul** » 19.11.2003, 02:47

fsgregs wrote:OK, I'm confused for real now. What I don't understand is how every new source can be wrong or right on this! A few months ago, Hubble shots from the space telescope showed a Mars that was much redder than this. The photos are posted on the forum somewhere. That too claimed that the shot was "true color"

I don't see why they can't both be close to true - after all, this one is of a very small area.

Cheers,
Paul

don · Post #8by **don** » 19.11.2003, 07:19

I would also think that distance has a lot to do with it, as well as the means by which the data or image is initially acquired. Not to mention the "personal experience" of the person doing the digital enhancement.

Lots of things come into play here <sigh>.

-Don G.

Post #9by **t00fri** » 19.11.2003, 08:35

bh wrote:Where's Fridger?!!

regards...bh.

I suggest recalling my thread on the subject
http://www.shatters.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3267&highlight=

that I appropriately called "The Changing 'True Color' of Hubble's Mars: '95 => '03". The consistently incorrect "red" Mars colors from Hubble's "True Color" images have notably also mislead me for quite a while. After the Pathfinder mission with its dedicated color studies there seems now indeed little doubt that Mars is dominantly NOT red. I have blurred the new True-color image to allow a better focussing on the colors involved

which matches perfectly the yelow-brownish colors that have emerged from the Pathfinder studies. CF my above thread!

Bye Fridger

John Van Vliet · Post #10by **John Van Vliet** » 20.11.2003, 07:49

for me it is personal "tast " i just like my burnt sand look , by the way my mars image i have up is a very old one i am redoing the colorizing .