by geckzilla » Wed Mar 30, 2016 8:27 am
Chris Peterson wrote:APODFORIST wrote:Isn't it a foto with enhanced colors (to see more details)? If this is the reason why I can understand it. But I am always interested to see them in true colors too.
Probably like that true color foto:
In contrast to a foto with enhanced colors (as today ADPOP):
I suspect that if we were standing on Mars, we'd actually see something much closer to the second, "enhanced" image. Our eyes and brains do an excellent job of automatic white balance, but that function doesn't work with photos. Whether we're in a room lit by incandescent lights or fluorescent lights, we see things almost the same (after a short adjustment period). But when we look at photographs made under those conditions, they look very different, and we usually can't normalize them. Put on pink-lensed glasses, and in a few minutes you won't be aware of them, and white will again look like white. Can't do the same with a pink filter on a camera.
We evolved to see things under Earth sunlight, and our vision autocorrects colors accordingly.
Neither of these images have been enhanced in a way that really brings out much more color detail. And there's really no such thing as "true color", given that color is a physiological response, not a physical one, and varies widely from person to person, in addition to being influenced by the viewing environment (which is why we have so many startling optical illusions based on color).
There have been some really, really long discussions on this over at the Unmanned Spaceflight forum. Like, what color is the sky on Mars,
really? You'll find several well reasoned examples of why this or that is the real color of Mars. Amusing, but in the end, pointless... at least in my opinion, anyway. Mainly for the brain's white-balancing ability which you mentioned.
[quote="Chris Peterson"][quote="APODFORIST"]Isn't it a foto with enhanced colors (to see more details)? If this is the reason why I can understand it. But I am always interested to see them in true colors too.
Probably like that true color foto: [img2]http://mars.nasa.gov/imgs/2016/02/MER-Opportunity-Rover-KnudsenRidge-PIA20318-br2.jpg[/img2]
In contrast to a foto with enhanced colors (as today ADPOP): [img2]http://mars.nasa.gov/imgs/2016/02/MER-Opportunity-Rover-KnudsenRidge-PIA20319-br2.jpg[/img2][/quote]
I suspect that if we were standing on Mars, we'd actually see something much closer to the second, "enhanced" image. Our eyes and brains do an excellent job of automatic white balance, but that function doesn't work with photos. Whether we're in a room lit by incandescent lights or fluorescent lights, we see things almost the same (after a short adjustment period). But when we look at photographs made under those conditions, they look very different, and we usually can't normalize them. Put on pink-lensed glasses, and in a few minutes you won't be aware of them, and white will again look like white. Can't do the same with a pink filter on a camera.
We evolved to see things under Earth sunlight, and our vision autocorrects colors accordingly.
Neither of these images have been enhanced in a way that really brings out much more color detail. And there's really no such thing as "true color", given that color is a physiological response, not a physical one, and varies widely from person to person, in addition to being influenced by the viewing environment (which is why we have so many startling optical illusions based on color).[/quote]
There have been some really, really long discussions on this over at the Unmanned Spaceflight forum. Like, what color is the sky on Mars, [i]really[/i]? You'll find several well reasoned examples of why this or that is the real color of Mars. Amusing, but in the end, pointless... at least in my opinion, anyway. Mainly for the brain's white-balancing ability which you mentioned.