Slashdot Mirror


Chinese Moon Photo Doctored, Crater Moved

mytrip writes "A controversy over last week's photo of the lunar surface, allegedly from China's lunar spacecraft Chang'e, appears to be resolved. It's real but it isn't. An expert says the photo's resolution shows that it is of recent origin. However, for some inexplicable reason, someone on Earth edited the photo and moved a crater to a different location. 'In the week since the picture was released amid much fanfare in Beijing, there have been widespread rumors that the photo was a fake, copied from an old picture collected by a U.S. space probe. The photo from China's Chang'e 1 orbiter is clearly a higher-resolution view, with sunlight streaming from the northwest rather than the north. The mission's chief scientist, Ouyang Ziyuan, told the Beijing News that a new crater had been spotted on the Chang'e imagery — a crater that didn't appear on the US imagery. Lakdawalla determined that the crater in question wasn't exactly new — instead, it appeared to be a crater that had been moved from one spot on the picture to another spot slightly south.'"

13 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. spoiler alert by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Informative

    SPOILER: It was a poor stitch/blend job.

    --
    This guy's the limit!
  2. Bad Astonomy by jawtheshark · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bad Astonomy readers are already up to date. It's an error in composition of the picture. Nothing less, nothing more.

    --
    Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    1. Re:Bad Astonomy by Kelson · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except it doesn't appear to be a correct analysis. I can easily see the difference in the lighting and composition, but there still appears to be an extra/moved crater in the Chinese photo.

      Two issues:

      1. Is it copied?
      2. What's up with the new crater?

      The analysis concluded that it's not copied, and concluded that the moved crater can be explained by a mistake stitching the components together. If you look at that article, you'll note that the new image is missing a small crater in one place, and has an extra small crater a little ways away, and there's an odd indentation around it. She figured out where the seam probably was, shifted the parts a bit, and they line up perfectly.

  3. TFA by sporkme · · Score: 4, Informative

    Lakdawalla found that a mistake was apparently made in stitching together the 19 strips of imagery to produce the finished picture - and that Chinese officials unknowingly pointed out that mistake as they defended the photo's veracity.
    Not a fake, not an intentional edit, and a moronic blunder in trying to prove authenticity.
  4. Misleading summary - it's not intentional by iamacat · · Score: 5, Informative

    As per the TFA, a mistake was made stitching together 19 separate photographs to produce image of a large area of the moon that the probe could not have captured in one shot. Since each picture is taken at slightly different angle and distance from the surface, some retouching is unavoidable. Otherwise some craters will look like a weird set of arcs with different radius rather than circles. Such stretching got to slightly move some depicted object from their exact position. In fact, it is not possible to produce a flat picture of a 3D object without distortions. Just compare the size and shape of Alaska on your globe as compared to your map.

    I would assume that you can request the original mission data for serious research use instead of having to rely on newspaper clippings for science. If those images are also doctored, then we have a genuine controversy.

  5. Doctored my ass by cats2ndlife · · Score: 5, Informative

    The original article says and suggests nothing about the photo being "doctored", it's simply a mistake that scientists make all the time. When can we expect a better moderated Slashdot or people who can read?

  6. For crying out loud, include the rationale! by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Informative

    The summary almost criminally neglects to include the reported reason for doing this, which is entirely legitimate:

    Often, surface features that show up on two strips of data have to be manually corrected to produce the finished image, due to subtle changes in perspective.

    "You know that there should have been seams in that image, and I just did not look for them carefully at the time," Lakdawalla told me today.


    If you've ever viewed satellite imagery, you'll recognize that the source images are not nice, ultrahigh resolution wide arc views, but instead low resolution wide arc views or high resolution narrow arc views. The 'recognizable' product that is released to a nontechnical public, such as the images used in Google Earth, are the result of post-processing including image registration, tone correction, etc. See this article on mosaicing multi-sensor images, for example.

    Surprise. Some technician made a mistake. No cookie.

  7. People, RTFA, read the spoiler posts...PLEASE. by Radon360 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I realize that it goes against the general Slashdot commenting procedure, but read just a little before commenting on this one, please.

    1. Two photos were poorly stitched together, repeating an image of a crater on the combined photo (the crater was photographed twice).
    2. Chinese scientists miss the poor stitch job and proclaim they found a new crater.
    3. Someone else takes a close look at this "discovery" and points out the error in the stitch job.

    The crater wasn't intentionally added, it's a result of trying to align two photos, each taken from a different perspective in which the edges won't completely line up exactly.

  8. Re:maybe just a watermark by HungWeiLo · · Score: 4, Informative

    jiyuu-shikan.org is a well-known Japanese history revisionist website. No better than Holocaust deniers.

    The best evidence they could come up with for the baby picture was "the photographer laughed" and "the guy carrying some baby walked towards the rail tracks".

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  9. Re:Who will pay the ultimate price? by wattrlz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Seppuku a.k.a. "Hari Kari" is a japanese tradition.

  10. Re:Bad summary by Kelson · · Score: 4, Informative

    Exactly how can you accidentally open up Photoshop and move a crater from one place to another?

    By taking 2 -- or in this case 19 -- photos that cover different parts of an area, stitching them together to make one big photo, and making a mistake with the positioning on one of the pieces.

    You did read the actual article before rebutting to a comment that told you the summary was inaccurate, right?

  11. Re:Bad summary by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not sure wtf is wrong with /. editors
    Read the FAQ - the editors specifically deny any attempts at fact checking. Slashdot exists to post interesting stuff fast, not accurately.
  12. Re:Bad summary by OriginalArlen · · Score: 4, Informative
    --

    Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven