China's Chang'e 3 Lander and Yutu Rover Camera Data Released

AmiMoJo writes: Detailed high resolution images from the recent Chinese moon mission have been released. Links to the original Chinese sites hosting the images are available, but Emily Lakdawalla of the Planetary Society has kindly organized them in English. Images show the lander, the rover and the surface of the earth. An interactive map is also available, built from data collected by the mission.

Comments

surface of the earth

[OzPeter]

Images show the lander, the rover and the surface of the earth.

The point of faking a moon landing is to hide the fact that you never made it there.

Very good imaging

[rmdingler]

Congratulations China. Chinese exploration of the lunar surface will hopefully lead to diverse international interest in development of national space programs.

It is good to see the fascination with footprints on extraterrestrial soil crosses cultural lines.

Re:Very good imaging

[k6mfw]

Gag. Another lame imitation of more advanced US missions.

Well, yes and no. Chinese have the best high res surface images from a rover, US has rovers on Mars, none on the Moon. US has excellent photos from manned missions but those are more than 40 years old. US has high res images from orbit but when considering surface images from a rover, the US has none and will not have any for years to come. First step is to dump the lunar phobia. Imagine something of Mars rover technology that can visit and analyze soils from places like craters that never receive sunlight. I want to have a rover visit the Apollo landing sites to observe how materials have degraded from more than 40 years of sunlight exposure. And to see if which flags are still standing.

It is interesting to see these lunar surface images, they don't circulate around the internet that much. Again, it seems a lunar phobia among Americans to avoid taking about the Moon with exception of the grand Apollo missions (which this country can no longer do).

Re:What about the people?

[jeffb (2.718)]

The money is being spent feeding scientists and engineers, and all the people from whom they buy things.

Sure, we've taken a limited amount of material entirely out of Earth's biosphere. But I understand that lunar landers are typically pretty tough and tasteless, no matter how you prepare them.

Re:But, but, but...

[jfbilodeau]

Of course! Those 'scientist' worry about making the details of the lander and the moon surface 100% realistic but forget to photoshop a couple of stars in the background. Silly 'scientists'.

Re:What about the people?

[Thanshin]

Those millions of dollars spent researching moon rocks would be much better spent feeding the starving people on planet earth.

The millions of dollars spent paving your country's roads would also be better spent feeding the starving people. And the million spent in movies, sports or producing reality shows.

Why is it always science that has to justify its usefulness for the good of humanity compared to feeding the poor? Why not every other human venture, of which the immense majority add a minuscule value compared to space exploration?

Re:Copyright

[thoromyr]

what does it mean to publish? Certainly, google translate *transforms* text, but it is only doing a transformation, it is neither "publishing" nor is it "making available". If google translate made available a document that was not otherwise available then that would amount to publishing. What they do is not publishing.

Although some authors try, they have no legal grounds for dictating how something they publish is consumed. For example, I might read a book in a silly voice. This definitely offends some overly sensitive authors, but they have no legal grounds for preventing me from doing so. A translation is, in a legal sense, a mechanical transformation. Its purpose is to not alter, but rather preserve, meaning and intent. It does not creatively alter the original and so is less affecting than reading a book in a silly voice. Historically, "translation" has gone hand-in-hand with publication -- after all, why would someone go to the effort of translating a work without securing the right to publish it and benefit from those sales?

When you say "how can this [tool] exist" you only specify google tools. If you are intending to refer to the blog posting then if the images are in fact copyrighted then it would be up to the copyright holder to take legal action to enforce their rights. They are under no obligation to do so, much less any other entity.

You are also assuming that everything is "protected" by copyright, but this is not the case. There's this thing called "the public domain". Now, true, it is small and growing only ever so slowly, but it does exist. In particular, in the US if the government produces something on the public dime then it is in the public domain. Well, I suppose it can get complicated, but that is a basic premise. And, while credits are listed for photographs in the blog post, there is no indication of copyright. That does not mean the photos are not copyrighted, but it does provide anyone offended by their republication the opportunity to notify the creator.

In short: not everything is under copyright "protection" and for those that are the "protection" largely consists of publication and redistribution (the right to copy), not for how it is presented (whether that is read in a silly voice or something else).

QED

Re:What's with the bright yellow?

[110010001000]

The Moon is made of cheese. That is the cheese peeking through the layer of dust.

Image Quality

[fourthrail16309]

How come these pictures look so good, but everything we see from NASA looks like it was taken with a 1968 camera?