On Jun 19, 6:26*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

Be so kind as to show me the properly enlarged image that you're
using.

I've come to a very strongly held conclusion that viewing images
of other planets is the ultimate of all Rorschach tests!

And I'm starting to come to the conclusion that our perception of
reality is as important or more than reality itself. .

~ BG

In other words, you couldn't even be bothered with using a free
download of PhotoZoom, much less to actually resample/enlarge the area
of that image that I've specified.

How is it that you are such a photographic expert, especially when you
can't even accomplish the most fundamental basics of digital image
processing?

btw; You do realize that moon water/ice is just another ruse.

LRO; Apollo impacts and their debris soon to be identified (at least
that’s the plan).

Our spendy LRO is up, up and away. Finally, there’s absolutely no
excuse whatsoever for not detecting each and every significant Apollo
item that’s bright and shiny while situated upon such a naked surface
that’s crystal dry, electrostatic charged, generally reactive and
nearly dark as coal. The undisclosed dynamic range of their primary
imager should knock our socks off, whereas even earthshine
illumination should be entirely sufficient, as well as whatever
desired color/hue saturation at less resolution shouldn’t be a problem
unless they intentionally assign false colors.

At the altitude of 50 km (30–70 km polar orbit) it should offer 0.5
meter resolution. Better resolution that’s technically within NASA
and DARPA capability may have to remain restricted, as well as other
science data may have to be need-to-know (same as the JAXA and ISRO
missions).

~ BG