PDA

View Full Version : Google Moon - Blacked-out Areas



Probed
2010-May-04, 05:12 AM
Some weeks back I was browsing Google Moon's new high(er) resolution strip (http://img25.imageshack.us/i/googlemoonhighresstrip.png/) made available in 2009 and came across some sections along the seam that appear to be more than just errors inherent in stitching process.

I decided to upload a video I made, using the tour option in Google Earth, to YouTube:
YouTube Video. 7min 4sec (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRqxaonf4jI)
(certainly not the best place to look for any real answers, that's for sure; but I digress.)
The video shows sections along the seam between the Low Resolution base moon map and the new High(er) resolution strip that don't fully make sense to me.

In most areas where the image data appears to be missing (eg: Video @ 2m 34sec), the underlying Low-Res base map shows through. Ostensibly the missing/corrupted image data has been changed to be transparent. This assumes that each of the individual images stitched together are rectangular and the now-transparent pixels allow for the unusual shapes in the example to appear.

In other areas, however, the missing/corrupted image data appears as a completely blacked-out (not-transparent) area. Some of these 'blacked-out' area's appear to be in direct relation to stitch points and may be explained as such (eg: Video @ 57sec). Others don't seem to be as easily explainable (eg: Video @ 1:09, 1:29, 1:45)

I put forward in the video title the question 'Bases/Structures?' and a distinction between 'Missing or Deleted' (eluding to a possibility of purposefully removed).

I am trying not to jump to conclusions (hence the '?' at the end of the title) however there is obviously some bias on my part towards the 'purposefully removed' end of the question.

I do NOT want this to be a thread about whether or not there are 'Bases/Structures' on the moon.

I DO want this thread to be about the following:

1) Why do some areas appear to be modified to introduce transparent pixels and others remain 'blacked-out'?

2) If the areas 'blacked-out' are corrupted/missing data like the transparent areas. why do they remain black when directly adjacent areas contain transparent areas?

3) When stitching together the numerous images to create the whole, why do these 'blacked-out' areas appear primarily along the short end of the rectangular image and not in the center(for example. and aside from overlap to correct center problems)?

4) Am I just suffering from Pareidolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia) when looking at the 'blacked-out' areas in the Video @ 1:09, 1:29 and seeing shapes that are simply the result of chance?

NEOWatcher
2010-May-04, 12:05 PM
My 2 cents based on what I have learned on this board.


1) Why do some areas appear to be modified to introduce transparent pixels and others remain 'blacked-out'?
2) If the areas 'blacked-out' are corrupted/missing data like the transparent areas. why do they remain black when directly adjacent areas contain transparent areas?
First, there are plenty of instances of data drop-outs on many space images. If they are stitching the images, and using an overlay of a base image, then perhaps the base image also has these drop-outs. Therefore; when the two images have dropouts that coincide, it is black. Otherwise the background image appears.
Also, if the background image were poorly stitched, then there would be plenty of black areas in it.


3) When stitching together the numerous images to create the whole, why do these 'blacked-out' areas appear primarily along the short end of the rectangular image and not in the center(for example. and aside from overlap to correct center problems)?
I have no solid answer, but perhaps there are more data aquisition problems on a transmission startup or shutdown that happen.


4) Am I just suffering from Pareidolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia) when looking at the 'blacked-out' areas in the Video @ 1:09, 1:29 and seeing shapes that are simply the result of chance?
I would say so. Otherwise there would be a whole fleet of F117s and B2s up there. They would be kind of hard to fly without an atmosphere to feed the engines.

Bobbar
2010-May-04, 12:55 PM
It would behoove us to try to find a more original source for the imagery.

Going strictly off what you see from 'The Google', and then concluding that there is some sort of problem with the data, is fool hearty. Who knows what Google did to format it for their software. Lets try to find the data from somewhere closer to the source, then we might be able to see what's missing from Google Earth (if anything).

Tedward
2010-May-04, 04:45 PM
Odd to remove what anyone can look at...... (OK, depending on the optics).

Bozola
2010-May-04, 05:17 PM
Are you proposing that there are Lynyrd Skynyrd cover bands hiding in the "blacked-out" areas of the Moon?

Bobbar
2010-May-04, 05:41 PM
My guess? If one was to overlay a higher resolution swath onto a much lower resolution base layer, one might cut out the old area that is going to be replaced and then paste the new area over-top of the hole they cut out.

I made an estimation as to where the hole was prior to pasting the new data on top of it.

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/7208/overlayhighlight.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/i/overlayhighlight.jpg/)

I would assume it would be likely that some automated blending was used to make this new, higher quality data blend better into the lower quality layer (which at this amount of zoom is almost a flat, gray blur), and in some spots the software got a little overzealous and started cutting into the deleted (black) parts of the underlying data.

Heck, it even looks like someone might just have made a random, sloppy scribble along the outer edge with an eraser/blending tool until they were satisfied with the results.

Perhaps it's nothing more than a rushed 'cut and paste' job by Google? Seems logical to me. :think:



PS: Don't let Joseph P. Skipper catch wind of this. I'm sure his explanation will be a wee bit more imaginative than mine. :p

moog
2010-May-05, 06:04 PM
The video shows sections along the seam between the Low Resolution base moon map and the new High(er) resolution strip that don't fully make sense to me.

Have you considered asking people at Google about this?


I put forward in the video title the question 'Bases/Structures?' and a distinction between 'Missing or Deleted' (eluding to a possibility of purposefully removed).

Why do you think Google would purposefully remove anything?



1) Why do some areas appear to be modified to introduce transparent pixels and others remain 'blacked-out'?

As mentioned data drop outs seems to be a likely candidate.
I imagine ensuring a consistent error free data transmission from a probe orbiting the moon would be a significant challenge.


2) If the areas 'blacked-out' are corrupted/missing data like the transparent areas. why do they remain black when directly adjacent areas contain transparent areas?

Have you considered asking the programmers at Google?


4) Am I just suffering from Pareidolia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareidolia) when looking at the 'blacked-out' areas in the Video @ 1:09, 1:29 and seeing shapes that are simply the result of chance?

Very likely.
Incidentally have you considered getting any of the imagery from the LRO for those locations.
It seems odd to me that you are only looking at Google's rendered version of the imagery.

ravens_cry
2010-May-05, 06:50 PM
I wonder if and when Google will add the LRO and restored Lunar Orbiter imagery.

captain swoop
2010-May-05, 09:42 PM
Probed, remember Google isn't a primary source.

What conspiracy are you proposing here (just so we are certain)

vonmazur
2010-May-08, 06:55 PM
Are you proposing that there are Lynyrd Skynyrd cover bands hiding in the "blacked-out" areas of the Moon?

Everyone knows it's Pink Floyd, hiding on the dark side....

Dale

stu
2010-May-10, 01:09 AM
I wonder if and when Google will add the LRO and restored Lunar Orbiter imagery.

Not gonna happen for quite awhile. LRO's LROC's WAC mosaics are reasonably good for lunar highlands, but there are significant photometric calibrations that still need to be figured out for the maria. I sincerely doubt that mosaics will be available within a year.

kleindoofy
2010-May-10, 01:19 AM
... the missing/corrupted image data appears as a completely blacked-out (not-transparent) area. Some of these 'blacked-out' area's ...
'Blacked-out' implies some kind of action, active editing, i.e. (purposefully) blacking-out data.

If the data is just missing and has not been actively removed or covered up, perhaps 'blacked-out' is not a good term to use.

'Data void' or 'gap' might be less confusing. In fact, I'm sure there's a correct term afoot already.

Gillianren
2010-May-10, 02:49 AM
"Blank" is probably a fine word for it. Adjective and noun in one handy word!

Piano Paul
2010-May-11, 05:46 PM
There is no dark side of the moon -- it's all dark, actually...

captain swoop
2010-May-11, 06:51 PM
I can't think of anything to say except...
I think it's marvelous!

ravens_cry
2010-May-13, 04:27 PM
Not gonna happen for quite awhile. LRO's LROC's WAC mosaics are reasonably good for lunar highlands, but there are significant photometric calibrations that still need to be figured out for the maria. I sincerely doubt that mosaics will be available within a year.
Oh well, thank you very much for the info.

rommel543
2010-May-13, 08:41 PM
All I can say is, have you ever tried stitching photos together? If you have a digital camera, go out and find a nice big area that you can start taking multiple pictures of. Now in an imaginary grid start taking photos from the highest visible point in front of you (i.e. the top of a big building, tree, etc) to the lowest point that you can see looking straight forward. Don't look at the pictures as you take them, just go along your imaginary grid taking photo after photo. so you can capture the entire scene in-front of you. Now go home, upload them to your computer and start attempting to stick them together. You're going to find area that don't quite overlap properly without twisting the edge of the image, or areas that you completely missed capturing at all.

Now being on earth you can go back to where you took the photo and take more pictures so you can correct the areas that are missed or messed. Being that the lunar pictures are somewhat harder to get a hold of, Google can't fill in the missing or messed up data so you get edges that have nothing there, or are blended with older low res information.

Bozola
2010-May-14, 03:50 AM
There is no dark side of the moon -- it's all dark, actually...

Next you'll be trying to tell me that the Moon isn't made of cheese...but it is and those Google maps prove it. The Moon is made of a kind of Pecorino suffused with truffles. Those black areas are really large chunks of truffles. Space bunnies eat truffles. Mars has no truffles. That's why the space bunnies are leaving Mars and going to the Moon. By all estimates they will have eaten all of the Moon truffles by the year 2012. We're next.