4 ms·

> The color was adjusted to match the lighting conditions as the human eye would see it if a person were standing on the surface of the Red Planet. Is the non-

by oplav 2mo ago

> The color was adjusted to match the lighting conditions as the human eye would see it if a person were standing on the surface of the Red Planet. Is the non-adjusted color version available anywhere?

GMoromisato 2mo ago
I don't know, but note that the raw, unadjusted images are no more "authentic" than the color-adjusted ones. Mastcam uses a Bayer RGB matrix, very similar to a consumer digital camera. Effectively, each "pixel" of the matrix has an R, G, or B color filter in front of it. I don't know the specific wavelength response of each filter, but it's likely to be very close to a high-end consumer camera. This is different from (e.g.,) Hubble images, which (a) are captured through non-RGB filters, and (b) use long exposures far beyond what a human eye would see.
zokier 2mo ago
My recommendation is that do not bother to try thinking too hard about Mars image colors, it's deep and ultimately unsatisfactory rabbithole, just enjoy the pictures as they are. Here is another rendering of the same raw data: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nev-t/55357706514/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/nev-t/55357706514/ It is no less or more non-adjusted, all digital colors are interpretations of some sort. Of course you can also download the raws from NASA/JPL and process them yourself. But then you have to make the decisions on how to render the colors. areo.info has some information about their own image processing pipeline for M2020/Perseverance images (the successor mission of MSL/Curiosity), with good links: https://areo.info/mars20/ https://areo.info/mars20/ Lot of that information should be applicable to Curiosity too. But on the other hand I personally think many of their renderings look pretty weird so take the info with a grain of salt?
- devindotcom 2mo ago
  yeah, this is good advice unless you really want to get deep into it. the people doing the colors on these know what they're doing. that said it can be fascinating to look at the process and try it yourself so go for it. I bet it's well documented.

by oplav 2mo ago

GMoromisato 2mo ago

I don't know, but note that the raw, unadjusted images are no more "authentic" than the color-adjusted ones. Mastcam uses a Bayer RGB matrix, very similar to a consumer digital camera. Effectively, each "pixel" of the matrix has an R, G, or B color filter in front of it. I don't know the specific wavelength response of each filter, but it's likely to be very close to a high-end consumer camera. This is different from (e.g.,) Hubble images, which (a) are captured through non-RGB filters, and (b) use long exposures far beyond what a human eye would see.

zokier 2mo ago

My recommendation is that do not bother to try thinking too hard about Mars image colors, it's deep and ultimately unsatisfactory rabbithole, just enjoy the pictures as they are. Here is another rendering of the same raw data: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nev-t/55357706514/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/nev-t/55357706514/ It is no less or more non-adjusted, all digital colors are interpretations of some sort. Of course you can also download the raws from NASA/JPL and process them yourself. But then you have to make the decisions on how to render the colors. areo.info has some information about their own image processing pipeline for M2020/Perseverance images (the successor mission of MSL/Curiosity), with good links: https://areo.info/mars20/ https://areo.info/mars20/ Lot of that information should be applicable to Curiosity too. But on the other hand I personally think many of their renderings look pretty weird so take the info with a grain of salt?

devindotcom 2mo ago
yeah, this is good advice unless you really want to get deep into it. the people doing the colors on these know what they're doing. that said it can be fascinating to look at the process and try it yourself so go for it. I bet it's well documented.