The face is located at 40.747484°N, 009.462645°W
If this was released by google, they'd just blur it out
A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
41–50 of 64 posts
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#42Sphinx on Mars
Does anyone know the more precise coordinates for the Sphinx on Mars that 40.75, 9.46?
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hasn't been really the case since french airbus started offering highres global imagery. If you have deep pockets, you can buy 30cm/px (i.e. order of magnitude better than this Mars dataset) images of pretty much anything.
I wonder if there's any sources for those images that aren't cough restricted. Could be interesting to play with, though maybe not worth paying for.
What do you mean, there are many resources that provide access to various satellite images. In general satellite imaging is not really that sort of hushhush industry it maybe was 50 years ago.
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#44Sphinx on Mars Does anyone know the more precise coordinates for the Sphinx on Mars that 40.75, 9.46? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cydonia_(Mars)
Switch to "DD" coordinate mode and go to 40.7456°N, 9.4621°W.
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#45I'd like to buy a mars globe with a nice up-to-date high-res print of the surface.
The globes i have seen are expensive and have outdated maps.
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there's any sources for those images that aren't cough restricted. Could be interesting to play with, though maybe not worth paying for.
What do you mean, there are many resources that provide access to various satellite images. In general satellite imaging is not really that sort of hushhush industry it maybe was 50 years ago.
I read parent as looking for sources that provide access to hi-res satellite imaging, without them needing to provide access to their wallet.
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if there's any sources for those images that aren't cough restricted. Could be interesting to play with, though maybe not worth paying for.
What do you mean, there are many resources that provide access to various satellite images. In general satellite imaging is not really that sort of hushhush industry it maybe was 50 years ago.
I think the thread is referring to satellite pictures of more sensitive locations (like military bases, gov facilities, etc)
But I can imagine it all depends on jurisdiction. A Russian or Chinese satellite imagery company will have no problem publishing clear images of US military bases, while an American satellite company may have to comply with US laws prohibiting that.
And vice versa.
Ultimately if you cobble together imagery from multiple sources, you can probably get everything you want.
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
However, the total surface area of Mars is roughly equal to the total land area of Earth.
If I wanted to make a textured globe, you just made my oceans totally smooth. Some of the tallest mountain ranges we have are in the area you just nulled out.
And how exactly would satellite imagery (no matter which wavelength range) help you texture the ocean floor in your globe?
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#49It's quite amazing and simultaneously ridiculous that we have a public 3D model of a distant planet at 5 meters resolution while the best available free and public models of Earth are at 30 meters.
You can fly your satellites lower in mars due to atmosphere density, as low as 20km it appears
Well yes, but we certainly have better resolution imagery of Earth for many places. It's just that the Mars data is free and the Earth data is owned by corporations that sell access to it for a lot of money.
Re: A 5.7 Terapixel Mosaic of the Surface of Mars
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I wanted to make a textured globe, you just made my oceans totally smooth. Some of the tallest mountain ranges we have are in the area you just nulled out.
And how exactly would satellite imagery (no matter which wavelength range) help you texture the ocean floor in your globe?
nobody said optical wavelengths were the only meaning of imagery.