Why are so many people trying to photograph Mars...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by John M, Aug 27, 2003.

  1. John M

    John M Guest

    ....isn't that what we put the Hubble up into space for? I mean it's nice
    that people are interested in it, but it seems like so much effort to get a
    fuzzy reddish circle, when you can download fabulous shots of Mars for free.
    To each his own I guess - I just don't get it.

    The moon I can sort of understand - with modest equipment you can actually
    get a decent shot of it. With Mars, everything I've seen looks like a ball
    of fuzz.
     
    John M, Aug 27, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. The challenge? The learning experience?

    Why try anything new, eh? Let's just sit around and watch TV all day.
     
    Andrew McDonald, Aug 27, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. John M

    Paul Heslop Guest

    Ah, just one of them things, there's millions of pics of the moon, and
    the sea, and the sky, and birds and blah blah, but we all got to do it,
    we have to have our own personal image.
     
    Paul Heslop, Aug 27, 2003
    #3
  4. You may learn more trying to capture an impossible subject than you do with
    an easy subject where you only need to change one or two camera settings
    to succeed. And unlike those other subjects, this close pass for Mars
    is quite short lived.
     
    Jason O'Rourke, Aug 27, 2003
    #4
  5. John M

    wREN Guest

    ...isn't that what we put the Hubble up into space for?

    No, that was for things much farther out. Ever notice that the pictures of
    planets around other suns are supposed to be taken from the Hubbell, yet it only
    gets really bad focus far away shots from planets in our own solar system?
    With something able to see so far, you should be able to see something the size
    of an ant on Mars, yet we get the same distant crap with an explanation that we
    can only get in to see on a scale of 17 miles across even with Mars being so
    close now.

    Something here doesn't make sense. And if anyone wants to go with the
    explanation of it being set with lenses that are only good for things outside
    our solar system, then why the hell take a photo of mars with it? Either way,
    there is no way to explain this in a way that makes any sense.
    I strongly agree. I feel the same way about taking photos of famous land
    marks that have already been taken with the best cameras in many shots and
    sizes, yet everyone takes out their inferior cameras and takes more shots of
    them every day.
    I don't either.
    But like you say, I can get better just by downloading from the thousands
    available.
    Or that staged fake looking set with the photos that are supposed to be of the
    surface.


    The US and Russia have been sending probes to mars every couple of months for
    the past few decades (and now other countries are doing so too) yet, allegedly,
    only 3 have ever landed successfully in our history. This is with TODAY's
    technology, YET.... they want us to believe that back with 60's technology we
    landed man on the moon SEVERAL times AND brought them back without any crashes
    or problems.

    That doesn't make any sense either, does it? We had the technology to land
    man on the moon and bring him back alive, not once, but several times, yet we
    have such bad luck with today's modern technology and computers to get a remote
    control car to land on Mars.

    Think about it.

    One of two things comes to mind....

    1) We never had a man on the moon and that was all bullshit seeing how hard it
    is just to land a remote control car on mars today.

    2) Considering we put so many men on the moon without problems with 60's
    technology, all the probes landing on Mars got there without any problems, they
    just don't want us to see what the hell it is they found that is soooooo
    interesting that they send probes to mars every couple of months for the past
    few decades.

    As we speak, there are 3 of them heading to mars now to land in Dec and Jan.
    US, Russia, Europe, Japan, everyone is sending probes to mars, and LOTS of them.

    I say they found life that is a lot more interesting than just some bugs or
    insects and they want to let out the information slowly as it will crush a lot
    of people's religious beliefs and could cause a panic to some people.
     
    wREN, Aug 27, 2003
    #5
  6. John M

    wREN Guest

    ...isn't that what we put the Hubble up into space for? I mean it's nice
    His point is that it is NOT something new, it has been done to death.
     
    wREN, Aug 27, 2003
    #6
  7. John M

    wREN Guest

    Let's just sit around and watch TV all day.

    Yes, that is sooo much more a waste of time then hanging around on newsgroups
    all day.
     
    wREN, Aug 27, 2003
    #7
  8. It was designed for deep space, but it also functions great for closer
    objects and is spending a lot of time right now on mars.

    My son's ex-wife worked on the project.
     
    Joseph Meehan, Aug 27, 2003
    #8
  9. John M

    SD Guest

    People like to take /their/ photos with the landmark so it is documented
    and the picture can bring to them their experience at the landmark. Who
    cares about the photo of the landmark, its just that /they/ visited it.
     
    SD, Aug 27, 2003
    #9
  10. John M

    daytripper Guest

    I wonder if the Hubble has enough FOV to get it all in one shot...
     
    daytripper, Aug 27, 2003
    #10
  11. John M

    Kent Fisher Guest

    If they put the Hubble in "portrait mode" they can get Mars in focus and blur
    the background of space to get a cool portrait-like effect.
     
    Kent Fisher, Aug 27, 2003
    #11
  12. John M

    Jean Craz Guest

    I strongly agree. I feel the same way about taking photos of famous land
    Ah, but you can just do that now with Photoshop! I have pictures of myself in
    front of all sorts of landmarks I have never been anywhere near.
    I think it is more of the mentality that there are certain things you are
    "supposed to" take pictures of.

    People don't take pictures to please themselves, but to please other people.
     
    Jean Craz, Aug 27, 2003
    #12
  13. John M

    Charlie Self Guest

    wren responds:
    With Mars closer than it has been for 60,000 years? Wow! I didn't realize Stone
    Age photography was so advanced.

    Charlie Self

    "Verbosity leads to unclear, inarticulate things."
    Dan Quayle, 11/30/88
     
    Charlie Self, Aug 27, 2003
    #13
  14. Yeah, but so have rocks and trees and people and dogs. There's really
    nothing new to photograph, so you might as well give up photography entirely.

    Dave
     
    Dave Martindale, Aug 27, 2003
    #14
  15. John M

    B Young Guest

    No way dude- look at this!

    http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/solarsystem/mars_hubble_010705.html

    Some of the best pics of Mars I've ever seen have come from the
    Hubble's planetary view camera. Of course, orbiters like the Global
    Surveyor have photo-mapped the surface too with thousands of pics- but
    I just love the pics that the Hubble picked up.

    The OP has a good point. Where is the challenge? No matter how good
    a photographer you are or how good your equipment is, its just gonna
    look like a spec of red dust. On the other hand, you don't need a
    several billion dollar space telescope to take a pic of your favorite
    bridge and potentially get something that rivals the pros.
     
    B Young, Aug 28, 2003
    #15
  16. John M

    John Russell Guest

    And the past two nights it's been completely clouded over in the Bay
    Area! :-(

    John
     
    John Russell, Aug 28, 2003
    #16
  17. John M

    Paul Bartram Guest

    Would you use fill-in flash, d'ya think?

    Paul
     
    Paul Bartram, Aug 28, 2003
    #17
  18. John M

    Lionel Guest

    Word has it that on Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:38:36 +1000, in this august
    I think it'd run the Hubble batteries flat too quickly. Besides, I
    believe that the built-in flash on the Hubble is only supposed to be a
    military secret.
     
    Lionel, Aug 28, 2003
    #18
  19. I think you'll find that is only half true. I take pictures to please
    myself - unless I suddenly become good enough to get paid for taking
    pictures (in which case, I might be tempted to work in a certain way in
    order to maximise my monetary goals), everyone else's likes and dislikes
    with regards to photography can go and take a flying leap at the moon (or
    mars). ;-) I am willing to bet at least half the posters here take pictures
    solely for their own pleasure.


    Rachael
     
    Rachael the Wiccan Rat, Aug 28, 2003
    #19
  20. John M

    John M Guest

     
    John M, Aug 28, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.