Mars 3 (Various Topics Merged) Options

[tedstryk]

On my website sometime back, I added a page on the image fragment sent back by the Mars-3 Lander. I released serveral versions, including the best quality processing using othodox techniques I would use on other images plus colorization here:
http://pages.preferred.com/%7Etedstryk/fragmentc.jpg
However, I released another image, which I called a "What if" image. This image can be seen here http://pages.preferred.com/%7Etedstryk/m3s5b.jpg It was produced via extreme processing of the original data to make a Mars-like scene, but I made it clear on my website it was only a speculative image. I strongly doubt if the raw data even shows Mars at all - it could be all noise. But since this mode of processing looked strangely Viking-like, I figured I would put it on the web. I was warned by several, who said that while fun, some kooks might take it seriously. My response was that I really don't care what kooks think. Then I noticed this web page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_2
They used the overprocessed image. I feel like it is being presented as a true photograph. This is of concern.

[Phil Stooke]

I had posted my opinion about this somewhere here on UMSF and elsewhere. The Mars 3 camera system was like Luna 13 with two cameras (not like Luna 9 with only one). The first part of the Luna 13 panorama was a view of the other camera (which did not work, we never got images from it) - so the first part of the Mars 3 panorama is almost certainly a view of the other camera, not the surface of Mars. Any structure in it is going to be some combination of glare and shading, possibly including reflections (but who knows what of), plus noise and scanning artifacts etc. We really should not look for the surface of Mars in the image. The original mission scientists would have grasped at anything real in that image, as it would have been an incredible feat, but even they denied it had any value as an image of Mars.

Phil

[Guest_alex_k_*]

I had posted my opinion about this somewhere here on UMSF and elsewhere. The Mars 3 camera system was like Luna 13 with two cameras (not like Luna 9 with only one). The first part of the Luna 13 panorama was a view of the other camera (which did not work, we never got images from it) - so the first part of the Mars 3 panorama is almost certainly a view of the other camera, not the surface of Mars. Any structure in it is going to be some combination of glare and shading, possibly including reflections (but who knows what of), plus noise and scanning artifacts etc. We really should not look for the surface of Mars in the image. The original mission scientists would have grasped at anything real in that image, as it would have been an incredible feat, but even they denied it had any value as an image of Mars.

Phil

This version seems to be hardly probable. Cameras for Luna 13 and for Mars 3 where developed by A.Selivanov, and the experience of Luna 13 was taken into account in the next project. The schema when the scanning started from the second camera obviously was too risky to be repeated in the martian project.

Here's an acticle written by Selivanov where he discusses about possible image from the Mars 3 lander: http://libgen.org/scimag5/10.1134/S0038094613030064.pdf . The technical information is very interesting, some assumptions are disputable. But he couldn't write such article if he knew that the camera started scanning from the second one.