The Planetary Society Blog

Emily... I absolutely love the work you do with these images and I do not want you to adjust your process on the off-chance it might prevent some folks with their own agenda from picking on some perceived flaw. They'll find that in any case (it's what they are committed to).

It seems in this case the "conspiracy folks" expose has been quite thoroughly debunked already... so that's good in my book.

Keep up the great work!!

As the commenter on fark (Spaced Cowboy?) suggested, I think you should add more of these artifacts to your photos, to mess with the conspiracy 'tards.

I know exactly what you had to do on these images because I had to do the same thing when I did them!! Dione moved slightly in each of the red, green and blue channel images so if one wants to see a color composite like shown above (or my version below) you have to align the moon in Photoshop and clone around it a bit. Basic stuff, but apparently I was brushing over secret alien bases or something...who knew. :/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightsinthedark/4698157425/in/set-72157624256471439/

I'll be more careful next time.

This is so lame, and so sad that: 1- it takes that kind of 'news' to bring science stuff to the mainstream media; and 2- said mainstream media even when telling the whole story still use headlines such as "Saturn moon pic: conspiracy or touch-up?" which considering most readers won't bother to read the articles to the end nor check sources, will likely further the suspicion.

A while back the BBC website had some kind of readers poll about the 'running figure' on Mars, disguising their carelessness (and/or ignorance) with the all-too common excuse of 'neutrality'. I tried to explain the sequenced filters imaging made it impossible for anything actually moving to appear as that 'running figure'. My comment was never validated.

Emily you do great work and I have enjoyed your images and blogs as far as a conspiracy it bothers me that data can be so misused to bring up stories like this. Thanks for the great updates, blogs, images that you share.

Emily, I don't think you should reprocess the image. It will just be another proof for those guys there was something to hide.
At least this story shows one evidence, is that this an eye catching picture. It is among the 2 pictures of Dione I have in my archives.

Emily, sorry to be out front but, you have created a public relations disaster for NASA. The average joe knows little or nothing about photo editing but they do listen to Fox News and Fox News is a major shaper of public opinion. They are running with this. I know you meant well but this is spinning out of comtrol and is no joke.

@mark: "public relations disaster for NASA."

Oh, please. It's "spinning out of control" like all the rest of other absurd claims about aliens in NASA photos, waving flags in *static* pictures, no stars visible, cosmic ray hits as alien ships, etc. It *is* a joke. Ignorant masses and news outlets would find something "wrong" even with a perfectly processed image. Not that they have the slightest idea how cameras on space probes operate and what their limitations are.

What *is* disastrous is that some people feel this nonsense should be actively debunked. It's not worth spending the energy. Those who see conspiracies have been seeing them even before this and nothing will be changed either way. People who are really, genuinely interested in what happened here will see it for what it is.

As for general media picking up on this, I better refrain from saying anything.

Thank you for your outstanding presentation here. Unfortunately, there are way too many functional paranoid schizophrenics out there who doubt everything around them, trust no one, are uneducated, do not understand real science, and have watched Independence Day a couple 100 too many times. Fortunately, they do not run our world !

haha, sorry you, a person of science, has to even think of responding to the moronic machinations of these freaks. You mean you're not hiding some massive alien mother ship somewhere???? LOLMaybe they are hiding behind Titan, or maybe there is a secret base on the dark side of the moon, or maybe they are ** ALREADY HERE !!!** AAAAAAHHHHHH. LOL.

I was amazed by the video on youtube, and well i took the liberty to do the same process, I love photoshop Im a graphic designer and konow the tricks, first of all well i have to admit good research, BUT, I dolunlodaed the real image fron nasa and did the process and tes something weird appears, and I aint from ani newspaper or anything. Stop covering something thatis already out.

@ #11: Thank you daniel for proving to all of us where the real problem lies... :|

When I saw this I thought to myself...wow, this is ironic in the extreme. They obviously don't know that you and the Planetary Society are all about working towards the discovery of extraterrestrial life! Regarding the whole UFO cluster-you-know-what, the uber-skeptics and the true believers have one thing in common...they both cling to their own decidedly non-science orthodoxies. As far as I've seen, you've always been a true positivist who is all about the science. Sucks that you have to put up with this crap!

Sincerely,
Future Planetary Society member.

Oh God...why do people always assume a big conspiracy? There is a very VERY good chance that the official explanation is true...if it was a cover up I'm pretty sure they'd make a better job of the Photoshopping

Generalizations of people who understand the complacent nature of humans and oppose it are not helpful. "Paranoid, psychos, conspiracy theorists, etc" are all very harmful labels in the argument for any kind of science or human advancement. Some guy on the internet saw a "photoshopped" image and blew the whistle on it. Am I the only person who can see the brush-strokes even without the contrast turned up? My point is - if you see an image released by a large entity, be it scientific, political or commercial, that is doctored in any way - the editor of the image is hiding SOMETHING. Maybe it's a "missing bit of shadow," maybe it's an alien space station. Maybe it's a mid-space explosion to catalyze the death of our sun.
Everyone just needs to lighten up really. End of story.
I just hope you're telling the truth, Emily.

That's no moon...

poor earthlings, not ready yet...

If your going to Photoshop an image you should at least leave the original from now on to keep stuff like this from happening. People get the feeling there is an alien base because there is no original image so people think you are hiding something.

Nearly every photo that gets published in some form or another is edited somehow. Whether it's cropped, rotated, level-adjusted, "airbrushed", etc., it's most likely had SOMETHING done to it to make it presentable. In the case of astronomical images, often they have to be edited to make them understood or appreciated better by the general population who may not be used to how the original "raw" images look. In the case here, the original images needed to be manually edited by Emily to show a "true color" version, and some of the editing was done – and she said this herself – in a "quick and dirty" fashion. Wham, bam, color image of two moons of Saturn. To make a note of some rough spots in the editing and immediately jump to conclusions of national conspiracy and alien cover-ups is, in a word, foolish. Foolish and inflammatory. May as well shout "conspiracy" every time a Victoria's Secret catalog comes in the mail, because there's plenty of Photoshop editing going on in there as well. And they sure don't show you the originals on those.

Any designer or photographer worth their salt will edit an image before presenting it. It's just how it goes. I'm 99.999% sure no one pressed the "remove alien bases" button on this one, or any others either.

Hi Emily,

All good here in none-conspiracy land. Just a pretty loose job on it, but fine by me (in the composite).

Best part of all of it is that it made headlines in news.com.au this morning, however, if you now search their site for TITAN, you will not find the article anymore.

Classic FOX, don't worry about it.

"Science data for Cassini are released quarterly, 9 to 12 months after they are acquired, so these images will become available at high quality on April 1, 2010."

Here we have the true coverup: NASA can send pictures into the past!

The real conspiracy is that this was a plot to purposely gain some publicity. Some people are just too smart...

What was the thing you photoshopped behind the moon

I understand it is normal practice to "photoshop" images before release, to make them look presentable to the general public. But when this sort of thing happens, and gets out of control, why not just release the un-"photoshopped" images?

Prove to everyone that there is no conspiracy...

...that you were covering up evidence of TMA-2 and its stargate trying to hide on the dark side of Dione. NASA should also come forward about the content of the 350 "lost" Cassini/Huygens photos as well. Too many coincidences, too many.

I'm a pretty good at Photoshop (13 years), I would like to get my hands on the ultra high res raw image of this optical aberration.

Tks!

Emily, great work, and don't listen to those "conspiracy theorists" spouting their crap.

Curious though, why Cassini (or any other spacecraft, for that matter) needs to do three separate exposures? I understand RGB (I'm a photographer/photoshop guy) but is there some reason that NASA doesn't equip the spacecraft with image sensors that capture the R, G and B channels simultaneously, like our modern DSLRs do?

I assume it's for bandwidth reasons - three greyscale images together result in a much smaller file size than one full RGB image?

So you DID photoshop the image, but you were not hiding anything. Thanks for clearing that up.

@kevin:
The filters give you much more flexibility, and more resolution for a given sensors size. "color" CCD just has red green and blue filters built into alternating pixels on the sensor. For science, the filter you want to use depends on what you are investigating. Many science cameras don't even have a full set of red, blue and green, they might have say near IR, cyan and violet instead. They also frequently have many more filters, to allow imaging in wavelengths that are useful for particular scientific investigations. Having 12 "colors" worth of filters on your CDD would really hurt resolution. Moving targets do present some complications, but this can generally be overcome in post processing, and it's effects on a given observation will be known in advance.

As an aside, the upcoming MSL mission is an exception to this. It uses CCDs with an RGB bayer patter *and* external filters, along with some careful calibration of the built in filters response to allow interpreting the effect of the external filters.

@Brian and others talking about this being "photoshopped". Read Emily's description of why this was done, and her other articles on space science image processing. Essentially all images (especially color ones) from space missions "photoshopped" to some degree because of the way the cameras work. They are designed to return the maximum useful science data, and turning it into something that approximates what a human would see requires additional processing. Frequently this includes combining multiple images, as Emily has done in this case. Showing the "original" image wouldn't give you any more of a "true" picture, and in many cases, your computer wouldn't even be capable of displaying the full range of data returned by the sensor. If you do want to look at the original data, NASA is required to make this available, and does a very good job of it.

Because that is quite possibly the worst photo "touch up" I've ever seen.

A 5 year old using the old Canon Crayola Rock software could do better. No offense.

I blame the terrible TV nowadays. Too few good documentaries but loads on nonsense programs about faked moon landings and alien abductions.

I only recently realised that the computer fault on Voyager 2 earlier this year was widely reported as alien interference!? The story even appeared in the Telegraph, a supposedly serious news paper here in the UK. You just have to feel sorry for them for being so stupid.

I think all the info on way of how images are made and how cassini creates images is freely available

So I think the guy is successful troll, who got attention he desired for.

Don't feed the trolls.

rhw007 reply to Emily

USGS ISIS is THE and I mean THE "OFFICIAL" PDS software for ALL...repeat ALL...Space Image Processsing for "Peer Reviewed" raw, EDR and final RDR data products from ALL USA spacecraft and USA instruments..visual data or otherwise.

If the RAW data, the ancillary data along with the ephemeris data you COULD have aligned ALL three RGB ... including the rings ... and not NEED to "Photoshop" ANYTHING.


Every one above talks about us "Tin-Foil Hat Whackos" as if ALL were ignorant and uneducated.

Some of us are pretty fracking (Wkikipedia this term - enlarge your vocabulary) smart AND do our own ISIS and ENVI/IDL processing IF...big IF here from Never A Straight Answer and Joker Poker Liars actually RELEASES that data needed for PROPER ISIS/Envi/IDL processing.

If you don't wait, or the data pipe-line isn't "tight" enough for even NASA PR folks to have access then do say EXACTLY what you are doing... Making "Pretty Pictures" that have no "scientific" validation.

In April 1998 they issued "CatBox" image with NONE of this data, in fact actually ran a HIGH PASS filter through it to REMOVE DETAIL before releasing, NO Ancillary data, NO Ephemeris, and a glib PR Release that was fake.

Yeah its "A PIle of Rocks"... Just like Giza Pryaminds, Sphynx, Mayan Pyramids, Chines, Japanese, American Indian, Mexican, and other STONE Intelligent creations around Earth.

What "kind" of rocks? Sedimentary, clay, igneous, Metamorphic, minerals what kind of "rock" ??

To date...NO Mineralogical MAP of them SPECIFICALLY !!!

Been 4 working orbiters ... where is Cydonia's Mineral Map less than 100 m/p or even AT 100 m/p but JUST the Cydondia Region. Can the USGS tell us NOW what their MAP term "Enigmatic" on the Old Map means about the region's origins? NO!!

So...if you are JUST making Non-Scientific "pretty pictures" then please say so right up front. The "CatBox" was FAR from "Science" or even a "Pretty Picture" for ASPOD

Bob
MyCommonSensePolitics

For what it is worth, the Belgian article also gives lots of prominence to directly quoting your own explanation of the procedure and merely adds in a sentence or two at the end (as if it were expected but regrettable) that the conspiracy people still weren't buying it.

This is one common well-paid scientist, stick to your orders and get praised OR be fired. Just blame the news media or its cohorts, the news will just fade away naturally....until one day someone will just say "I think I heard this before", and other will say "why did you not tell us?". For now the news will just be as it is like Jules Verne's written imaginations.

Also I'm NOT saying ANYTHING about the 'validity' of the current image "anomaly" itself.

Merely that there IS a Brutal Truth Flat Fact that Never Admit Something Anomalous has been caught altering data for PR purposes.

Bob

Um... Robert Williams... wow man, I think you need to get rid of any computer you own and just go outside for awhile. Seriously, I think... repeat I THINK... you are batshit crazy.

No, NASA has nothing to hide huh? Go watch the disclosure project; seriously. NASA's own people have come forward and admitted covering stuff up, and are trying to get congress to listen to them. I think $$$ is more important to you EMILY.

DominatorPS3 - Or... maybe... there is no conspiracy and you are just a quack. The disclosure project is a joke. Military experiments are likely the cause of the vast majority of "UFO" sightings.
The government can't hide the fact a president gets a hummer in the oval office, but they can keep aliens secretly hidden, blow up buildings with commercial aircraft, and tons of other covert conspiracies. Riiight.
The image correction Emily employed is simply that, and you and Bob apparently wear tin foil hats and sit in your basement believing all sorts of quack conspiracy ideas.

In answer to Kevin, more useful scientific data are obtained with a monochromatic detector equipped with ultraviolet, visible light, infra-red and polarising filters used in pairwise combinations than a DSLR-type 'RGB' detector. Images are data, remember.

Reading up I see that Reed has already addressed Kevin's query. Apologies for the redundant information.

First of all: I do not work for NASA. All that I say here might contain mistakes. I do belong to the planetary science community though. English is not my native language - also a source for misunderstandings.

Second: I would like to thank Kevin for actually asking himself (and the planetary science community) WHY these pictures are taken the way they are.

So I feel Kevin deserves an detailed answer, which I will try to give. To learn more you can also look at the site of the CASSINI ISS camera http://ciclops.org/?js=1 or at http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/

The Cassini Imaging Science Subsystem (ISS) consists out of two cameras - one for wide angle images (or context images) and one for narrow angle images. Both cameras have filter wheels with filters that either allow light of specific wavelenghts or polarisation to pass. For scientific images this is clearly the better option than "only" to have RGB. To do images that are similiar to what a human being might see - if he or she would ever get to Saturn - there are filters that let red, green, and blue light pass. In image that a (healthy) human being sees in good lighting conditions also is picked up in the eye by three different sorts of colour receptors. These also recept red, green, blue respectively (compare e.g. Vision Res. Vol. 11, pp. 799-818, 1970). Though the bandwidths of cassinis RED, GRN, BL1 filters are not exactly the bandwidth of the average human eye it still helps us human beings to build colour images from these as Red, Blue and Green channels. Also (almost) every TV and computer Monitor gets its picture from RGB encoding.

So what Emily did was the perfectly reasonable choice of taking three images with one of the two wheels set to a clear filter (CL1 or CL2) and the other to (RED, GRN, BL1). (If you took images with another set of filters, please correct me, Emily).

The CCD has 1024 x 1024 pixel. So this is the best resolution of images. Everything with a higher resolution will have been improved for a more aestetic viewing experience, but will not contain more "data" then the original picture.

Why did Emily have to photoshop the images for a more pleasant viewing experience? Apart from the social part relating to mass media, news cicles and these things I will rather go into the other aspect of that question.

As Saturn is roughly nine to ten times as far from the sun as our own planet it only gets 1/81 to 1/100 of the amount of sunlight Earth gets. When to take a picture with these lighting conditions and even take away some of the light with the filters you will need long exposure time for the image. Exactly as you would with your photo camera at home - and cassini can't just use a flash light. But as you have to take the three channels one after the other and there might even be another image taken between those images the object and Cassini itself will have moved quite a bit meanwhile.

For many of the problems that derive from that software that was designed for planetary science exist and helps us scientists a lot. For Cassini Data usualy the afore mentioned ISIS(3) is used. For other experiments on other probes also VICAR is very commonly used. But the problem that Emily wanted to solve was not one of those, where ISIS is helpful. She did not try to improve the relative pointing of the images on Dione to improve the acuracy on the surface of Dione (where ISIS would have helped quite a bit). She wanted the limb of dione be equaly "nicely" looking on all three colour chanels of the final image. There the ISIS suite would not be as helpful. She could have used ISIS a bit more in the process and switched to Photoshop a bit later and still the final image would have gotten artifacts from that. The artifact might have looked different, but still there would have been artifacts.

Ok, lets look at both sides of this.

Side #1: NASA is participating in a grand complicated conspiracy to airbrush out alien artifacts from probe pictures.

Side #2: The probe takes RGB filtered pictures and, as a result of celestial mechanics, the moons in question politely refused to "hold still" while their pictures were being taken.

If you hear hoofbeats, think horses...not zebras.

SO...if NASA is participating in this grand conspiracy with far reaching implications, knowing that

a)they have access to resources such as the NSA, DIA, NRO, and CIA image processing teams,

b) with an image as potentially culturally shocking and world altering as one that shows conclusive proof of aliens or mystical ancients or space hippies or whatever,

would they

a) trust the editing of such an image to a planetary science for whom Photoshop is probably a hobby more than a profession

OR

b) give the image to the NRO, CIA, DIA, NSA teams for processing

OR

c) just never release the image as the risk vs. reward is to skewed.

My guess is (C). Think about it. If you wanted to cover something up, and I mean really bury it from public sight, would you risk blowing that cover just so you could show the general public a really cool picture?

So it is what it is, a really cool picture. That's what I was trying to say.

I don't believe you are hiding anything but where is the PSD showing your work? That should shut some people up.

Having said that, If you are going to be editing photos such as this, perhaps you should do a better job in the first place.

The disclosure project is a joke? Not real? These are highly respected people that served years in the military- and they are even challenging congress to hear them. Ever hear of Donna Hare?? Go do some research, then try to debunk me. @ Brodie- your right. Its not me that started this. Please feel free to take a look at my newest video you non believers, lol.

Brodie: You can download the original images from the links provided in this post. Anyone who thinks those are forged isn't likely to be convinced by any PSD that Emily could provide.

As for doing a better job, you might have a point if the purpose was to hide something. If the purpose was to make a pretty picture quickly, then it's hard to see how artifacts that only show up under ridiculous contrast settings are a problem. But again, the original data is available so feel free to have a go at doing a better job if you like.

Go look up Donna Hare, ''REED'' and everyone reading this. Debunk it if you can. NASA employee....official....congress....nothing to hide? WOW, just WOW....

I just want to thank the large majority of you who are participating constructively in this conversation, asking good questions (like, "why do spacecraft take pictures this way?") or providing very helpful responses about how space imaging works. There is some great material in these comments, and I'm reading and will collect some of the questions and answers for a future post.

I want to correct a misconception I've read above: I don't work for NASA. I never have. I work for The Planetary Society, which is not part of NASA. We are a nonprofit organization (a 501c3). We're a nonprofit group that seeks to advocate the exploration of other worlds, which sometimes aligns us with NASA and sometimes has us speaking out against the choices NASA makes. Learn more here: http://planetary.org/about/ You may rightly wonder, then, why a picture that I processed was posted on a NASA website -- that was an editorial decision made by the guy who runs that particular website, Robert Nemiroff. Events like this one are the main reason you don't see stuff from non-NASA people posted on NASA websites very often, sadly.

I see lots of demands for the raw images. You can get Cassini's raw images within hours of their downlink from the spacecraft here: http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/photos/raw/ The archived, high-quality versions may be found in the Planetary Data System beginning about 9-12 months after their acquisition here: http://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/ or here: http://pds-rings.seti.org/ I have posted some tutorials and explainers on how to access and process them here: http://planetary.org/explore/topics/imaging/

To all of you who say you can do a better job processing the photo than I did -- and I'm sure many of you can -- go try it for yourselves, and post a link here once you've done it! I'd be very happy to have a better version of this composite to post than the one I made in about 10 minutes of work. In fact, it would be fun to see what different people come up with in processing this set of photos.

Sure would...but...since I already KNEW:

1. you didn't work for NASA
2. This was a Planetary.Org blog
3. APOD I hope CONTINUES to take 'civilian' processed images AND 'commentary' that includes the RIGHT to disagree with 'policy' or a new 'iterpretation' of data...provided acess to ALL data necessary to repeat the process. Ie: raw, EDR, RDR, ancillary and ephermis data.
4. Thank You for interupting your vacation...now go back on it and leave this issue for staff ... if your wish :) Or like me, despite increase in FAMILY responsibilities I STILL try to follow my Space Interests... give as short reply as needed...but I will NEED several weeks to have the free time to do ANY study of ANY area.
5. This area...imho...is unintersting and consider putting this "challenge" out SHOULD be COVERING and ABOUT something that the OLD USGS MAPS call for "Origins" of terrain as "Enigmatic". Cydonia. And NOT necessarily the Ares Face as a "Pile of Rocks" , in the same way it could be argued that the Giza Pyramids, Sphynx, Mayan Pyramids, Inca, Japanese, American Indian, Mexican Pyramids and StoneHenge are "Piles of Rock".

So...if the USGS and ISIS folks are as helpful as I remember them to be...or just having RDR, ancillary and ephermis data would allow proper IDL based processing without ISIS using UnixOS based operating system.

But...Time...Location Location Location. Also a Historical Political Perspective would make a much more interesting and expansion of barriers rather than trying to align few feet of ice-dust in deep space when there much more interesting spots. Like a MSL landing Zone at 42 deg Lat and 315 East Long hmmm???

Have a good vacation and election season :D

Bob
MyCommonSensePolitics

I heard there was a face on Mars and I SWEAR I can see a giant monolith floating just above and to the left of Titan...

For all you folks who don't like the product of the process; as has been said before, you can always get your own raw images and cook them and serve them up however you wish.

For all those who still insist there's some great dark conspiracy; fund, build, launch, and direct your OWN interplanetary spacecraft and then YOU can control ALL your OWN DATA...

Emily I applaud your work - ignore the nutters. The only question I have is how did Titan end up yellow in your final picture but all 3 originals were black and white? I am a photoshop dunce, so bear with me please. I'm just curious - no conspiracies hiding under my cranium.

Color images are made by combining three images using red light for one image, green for the second, and blue for the third. Dione is bright in all three color channels and appears white. Space is dark in all three channels so appears black. Titan is brightest in the red channel, less bright in the green channel, and darkest in the blue channel, which results in its appearance as orange (red light mixed with a bit of green light). I explain this all in great detail in my image processing tutorials, which you can access here: http://www.planetary.org/explore/topics/imaging/tutorials.html (just download the powerpoints if you don't want to sit through the video). Also do a web search on "rgb color images" or something similar to learn how computer screens produce color images.

Hi there, Emily.

I recently heard about this story, and the first thing that came to my mind was "why not try making a colour composite myself?"

So that's what I did. I wrote a pretty lengthy post in my blog explaining exactly what I did and what had to be done in order to get a good looking picture of Saturn's moons. It ends with a colour composite very similar to yours - the only difference is that I didn't airbrush out the extra Diones in the green and red channels.

The result is a pretty informative article that (in my personal opinion) explains the process very well. The article ends with a comparison between your composite and mine - it's immediately obvious why you airbrushed the image.

http://poopcake.tumblr.com/post/1337328670/nasas-saturn-moons-coverup-uncovered

I hope you'll find the time to skim through it, or something! I just hope all of this will blow over soon - it's a real shame this great blog gets so much negative attention.

Thanks for that analysis, it was terrific -- and you saved me some work making those misaligned RGB versions, in case I want to go further in depth into this particular case in the future!

Commenters here may also enjoy this analysis by a "hacker" of exactly what kind of processing must have been involved in producing the picture. http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?%2Farchives%2F399-A-Harsh-Mistress.html

Its he funniest thing i've heard recently, i hope Emily can laugh about this aswell. I have to admit, its sloppy work... but not a mistake a normal internet user couldve noticed. In print you learn to check the seperate channels the hard way when working on an image, cause it'll show.
How this story is blown out of proportion is beyond me, someone technical working in media should've recognised what happend with this image right away.

This argument is absurd and needless. We will all know the truth when the fleet arrives from Saturn to destroy us. Nasa, The Planetary Society and ALL scientists the world over have the opportunity to save us from the total destruction of our species and the added opportunity of seeing Sarah Palin as our next President. But instead they use Photoshop to cover up the truth and with their digital brushes, lay waste to all human history.

I also know that you all have stolen my medication and I will find it eventually.

.....readin thro thu varius posts in this thred leevs one bewilderd at thu abomnibal spelin and gramer. culd expekt tis if it wer second graders rightin BUT... seeing it is adults who seem to have the time to contribute to this pointless subject, one would expect that they would - atleast - read through their post before hitting the "Send" button to check what they have written. Door MAT