Amazing Martian Scale-O-Vision !

One problem that  befuddled the very first who viewed any images of Mars was the apparent insubstantial and unstable nature of what they saw. Eventually, probably sooner rather than later, it was realized that they were seeing mixed images. One thing was evident at one distance, and something else at another. The effect ( the tolas effect, ahem) was so much more sophisticated than any shadowplay ever seen before that it was misdiagnosed. Either it was some sort of unknown technology, or some trans-dimensional situation. The second possibility, popular with the mathematicians, led to a long-standing paranoia about physically interacting with the locations. Both theories were somewhat accurate, but the paranoia was groundless.

The people responsible for the Martian Artscape were indeed seeing more dimensions than we normally do, but more in a scalar sense than an alternate universe one. Their perception, their consciousness,  was operating at many levels, so the “macro” view we see from miles away was mingled with the “micro” view we see when using magnification. That is part of what they lost, and  what they sought to regain. By having a visual anchor to focus on, they could move the conscious mind from scale to scale, and hopefully, realm to realm, something  they once had taken for granted. The “dimensional technology” long sought by those who came later to search the ruins is right there in plain view. But it is a mental technology, not a machine. Magick, the real kind, if you will. We have the ability, we just don’t realize it. But that is another story.

How to look at Mars:

The organic mechanism of vision is fractal in nature. The patterns integrated into meaningful things by the mind are pulled together from fractal relationships in what is seen by the eyes. If that sounds a bit arcane, and I am sure it does, here’s an example of the use of that process or mechanism that is not from Mars, but from your Sunday newspaper:

There are complex picture constructs, visual toys,  called stereograms. These consist of patterns of dots which, when viewed in a particular way, by slightly crossing the eyes, yield an apparently three-dimensional image which was not at all visible by cursory observation of the picture. They can be easily printed out, do not require high resolution, and even are sometimes used as filler items in the color section of the Sunday paper. Not everyone can easily manage to see them without getting a slight headache, but no one disputes that they are real. The way they are made, however, is what is of interest here. They consist of two separate images which are each run though a different “screen” and then combined into a single image. Think of the standard rotogravure or halftone screens that are used in printing to spread out the ink as dots so it won’t blot, or for texture effects. More on that in just  a second.

During the Victorian era, many artists and illustrators played with assemblages of images which would resolve into a completely different image when seen from a distance. Even in classic paintings from the Renaissance, close inspection sometimes reveals that some little detail is in fact a fully realized tiny image of something else, a little visual joke by the artist. But the Victorian style, resurrected by the Pop and Acid painters, goes beyond that by depicting different intentional scenes.

Print screens are generally arrayed as grids, rectilinear patterns of dots which translate darkness or density into different sizes of dots to display the image. If you get too close, all you see are the dots. You need to be (relative to the contents) far enough away for the dots to fuse into an image. Tricking your eyes, in other words, into triggering the integrating function of vision. You see this every time you look at an icon on your computer desktop- try digging out an icon and blowing it up really big. It doesn’t have a fraction of the details you apparently see when it is its proper size.

The stereogram uses fractal patterns for the screens. The “secret” image  uses a different fractal as a distribution pattern, and so when the  images are combined , only the overt base image is visible. When you force your eyes to refocus on an imaginary point “beyond” that overt image, the fractal-integrating function of your vision kicks in and recognizes the other pattern, automatically refocusing on the “secret” (that’s what they call it) image. Whenever your eyes see slightly different things, the stereo illusion is created, so it magically appears in three-dimensions. That  stereo reflex is the same one that makes Viewmaster slides and those red-green anaglyph glasses work. Or the occasional headache-provoking 3D movie using special polarized glasses. These are the visual mechanisms involved in the Martian dioramas as well.

Fortunately, you do not need any special glasses. The stereogram technique of relaxing your eyes and looking “through” the image is more than sufficient. Unfortunately, unless you happen to actually be staring at the actual location, knowing what is there to be seen is not the same as seeing it well. These were not designed to be seen from photographs.

No. no, that is not a cop-out. You can see some of it on the images, just not everything…and for all the hundreds of thousands of images taken of Martian landscapes, not all were successful at capturing much of what is obviously there. I managed to isolate a few demonstrations and samples for you by using a rather clever technique (if I do say so myself), but be aware there is much, much more to be seen.

Here’s what I did: I started with the admirable level of detail provided by all those expensive NASA cameras (especially the MGS) . Dr. Malin seems to be as fascinated as I am by the tolas, and beautifully photographed many of them as apparent primary targets. The Odyssey camera tends to rely on multiple filters shooting single locations at various wavelengths, which yields a different set of resultant permutations.  The MGS tried for maximum sharpness, as far as I can determine, and that is better for this technique. Enhancing the corrected image up to a maximum level of resolution came next. Don’t worry, this isn’t going to get too nerdy.

A computer screen is very, very sharp. It is far higher than any television, higher even than the movie standard of “High Def”. At least, that is true of the old fashioned cathode ray tube kind- if you have a modern flat panel LCD, the resolution and contrast are lousy unless it is a very expensive one.  But the display resolution is fixed- the number of pixels on the screen does not physically change when you change the setting from, say 800 by 600 to 1024 by 768. If you do a “screen capture” (that’s what the “print screen” button on the keyboard is for, it copies the display onto the clipboard), the image thus saved is only at a low resolution of 72 even if you’ve set your viewing display in Photoshop at 300. That’s the old Windows default number, from back when the monitors were lower capability. Anyway, when you zoom in on an image, even though you made it bigger on screen, you are simply seeing a smaller portion of it at the same resolution. Following so far?

If you load one of the full-resolution Mars images into a good graphics program and then zoom in and out, you will be able to see the image change. Sometimes, a whole series of expressions  unfold on a face, or something will morph into something completely different. Often, the effects are subtle, but no less amazing. You are imitating the experience of moving closer and farther away from the scene. More sophisticated mutations are undoubtedly available if one could move across the scene, but that is not possible to emulate from a single image. And not every location provides these little pseudo-movies. Now then, what I did was to make a series of screen captures while zooming in on an image, and then resize each of those to match. I only found a few images where the stages of change were  distinct and appropriate to this procedure, but I hope those help indicate what is there. You can see it happening on most images that are relatively close-in, but it is very difficult to freeze-frame. I do not know if the NASA minions actually ever even figured out this little trick themselves. Anyway, enjoy.

The more important tip is the comparison to the stereogram. If you simply stare at an image for a while, you will start to notice the internal symmetry, and more and more things will become evident. Just break out of the conditioning- you are not imagining things, you are not going insane, it is not “tricks of light and shadow”, pareidolia or The Old Man in the Mountain Syndrome. It is Mars, and what you are looking at is your rightful legacy. There is meaning there, wisdom and beauty.