Sol 376 - Navcam 360's...

2-D (full frame):


Anaglyph (bottom cropped):


(The near forgrounds on these 360 Nav anaglyphs often blend up with a variety of alignment differences between channels so I usually focus on getting the horizons and surrounding terrain well blended instead. The bottoms are cropped to minimize the very near foreground misalignments. We're moving along at a pretty fast clip these days so I don't labor over the foreground mismatches a great deal...)

Sol 371 - Navcam 360's.... and aye Lads 'n Lassie's what a brilliantly crisp Autumn day it be!

2-D:


Anaglyph:

Sol 370 - Nav 360's...

2-D:


Anaglyph:


FredK: "Subtracted the average..." Brilliant idea... just freaking brilliant.
Mr. Sorenson: The Sol 365 MC34 360 is just sensational. Very good sky work and the blending is seamless. Thank you.

The eclipse thumbnails appear to indicate a maximum conjunction at almost precisely the 03:22:00 P.M. LMST mark, the exact time of the RLB darkening event. Way cool catch by the imaging team.

And speaking of cool - Sol 369 tracks anaglyph - gotta love that repeated JPL Morse Code track. Easy to judge distance too, I believe it's about 1.5 meters per rotation if I'm not mistaken. (50cm wheel diameter x 3.14 = 157cm or 1.57 meters).

Sol 369 - The new position from the 5 Navcam horizonal frames in thus far. Another example of how deceiving the landscape can be in 2-D. The flat image looks almost featureless. But in stereo, the terrain undulations are quite varied and numerous, including a fairly deep depression just a few meters NW of the rover.

2-D Full Frame:


Anaglyph - (bottom cropped):


...and... Good catch on that "gust" sequence FredK. At first I thought perhaps it was just a difference in exposure values for the first few frames, but - following the first frame in the sequence (#172292) the changes don't seem typical of an exposure value change. Or do they? Hmmm. The sequence appears to begin in the middle of the "event":

1. #172292 - 03:21:57 P.M. LMST - The foreground is slightly darkened, Mt. Sharp is full sun.
2. #172305 - 03:22:09 P.M. LMST - The foreground remains exactly the same exposure (i.e slightly darkened) while Mt. Sharp darkens.
3. #172324 - 03:22:28 P.M. LMST - Both the foreground and Mt. Sharp lighten to normal - but - the sky directly above Mt. Sharp is a bit darkened.
4. #172337 - 03:22:41 P.M. LMST - The sky over Mt. Sharp lightens slightly.
5. #172350 - 03:22:53 P.M. LMST - The sky over Mt. Sharp lightens even more.
5. #172363 - 03:23:06 P.M. LMST - Everything back to normal for rest of sequence.

The nagging thing is this all appears to have happened over the course of just over one minute. Could "a gust" be moving that fast? If not, what else is going on? Are we just looking at anomalous exposure variations?

Gerald that brings up an interesting new observation. Assuming that the azimuth data from the MC 100 images is fairly robust, the mystery object must be exactly at or very near to 341 degrees. So if the object is actually farther away, drawing a line from MSL directly down a 341 degree line actually intersects a rock that appears to have very lightish looking flanks, just past the backshell at a distance of 460 meters (see annotated image below) consistent with your revised distance range. It also appears to be on somewhat elevated ground as well, as evidenced by the anaglyph referenced by FredK above. Whether this is the object or not is anybody's guess but it's in a dead on position for it.

And great work on the ground feature ID's FredK. Those "map to panorama" associations echo my observations as well but I stopped short of making the actual annotations. The small rise you circled in black (nearest to the rover) illustrates how easily terrain features can just dissolve into seemingly flat terrain in 2-D imagery. Though your annotation of it covers a much smaller area on the image than the map, in the full width anaglyph that seemingly small rise even exceeds even the map annotation in extent, extending from about 334 degrees all the way past the 1.71 azimuth. In the 2-D version there's a suggestion of some minor elevation but it pops right out at you in stereo. It's very deceptive terrain to say the least.

Based on your graphic Gerald it indeed does appear to be very closely aligned with the frame extents as mapped by Joe's map. I suspect however that the mapped position of MSL on Joe's map is a few meters to the west of the actual position at the time of imaging for two reasons.

First, the two craters clearly evident in the MC 100 image and nearly centered in the MC 34 image image are well within the imaged frame, but don't appear so in Joe's auto-generated position. Second, the big rock on the left side of the annotated panorama images I posted on the previous page, should be at about at about 315 degrees, whereas from Joe's mapped position it appears on the HIRISE base map at 325 degrees. I mapped MSL's position on my azimuth lined map based on this logic. The position difference, though minor, shifts the frame coverage to the east, placing the backshell about square in the center of the frame again, on or about 339 degrees and "the object" to the right of it, just as seen in the imagery. Granted, it's so close in general we're really just splitting hairs here, as there are just too many variables from post-process imagery clipping to manually mapping the azimuths, map projections, and on and on. It's just too close a call to rule out anything.

Bottom line is, there's something over there within a degree or two of where the backshell should be, and it's either a rock or the backshell. Based on the expected longevity of this mission and the likely hood we're never coming back this way, and our proximity to the chute and backshell at this juncture, I'm surprised we didn't just buzz over there last week. I'm with Vikingmars on that.



P.S. If scientific justification is needed for the side trip, it could be written up as " brief stop at EDL Hardware location to study dust accumulation rates within a known time frame".

Gerald that's an impressive layout. Not sure I completely understand your calculatory equations, but if the distance is indeed consistent - then nailing down the precise azimuth to the suspected target vs. where the backshell should be would be the next logical step.

Naturally, an accurate appraisal of that means that the exact position of MSL at the time of the Sol 364 and 365 images is crucial. Luckily the two distinct sandy craters in front of the rover nail that down reasonably well so far as the angle to the suspected target object is concerned. In creating the images below I've come to the personal conclusion that the object in question is actually a bit over two degrees to the east of where the backshell should be.

Below I've placed azimuth lines in the center of the Sol 365 MC100 frames based on the reported azimuth of the camera. Overlaying a coresponding series of lines on Joe's map (with a carefully placed backshell and parachute location) the direction to the backshell should be about 338 to 339 degrees. The object in question looks to be centered on 341 degrees.

That minor difference could be explained by a variety of inaccuracies in creating the panoramas and the map lines below of course, such as center-of-frame offsets in post-process cropping of the frames - but - ground features in the panorama azimuth divisions vs. the corresponding map divisions match very well - and more directly - that far crater wall has 3 distinct small craters on it's slope (right behind the 339.37 line on the panos below), and drawing a straight line from MSL's position to the center of the right hand crater of these 3 craters passes directly over the backshell itself - not just near it- directly over it. Google Mars also backs up a 339 degree azimuth direction and backshell alignment along this line. The object in question then is clearly a few degrees to the right of this line. Even moving the MSL position slightly to the right or left within a reasonable distance that keeps the foreground craters consistent with the imagery doesn't change this overall line of sight of where the backshell position should be, i.e. a few degrees LEFT of the suspect object.

So what is it? There's a few bright looking candidates on the map the the right of the backshell but it's anybody's guess unless we drive over there. My personal opinion is that, as tantalizing as it is, the backshell is to the left of this object and still out of sight. Of course I could be wrong.

In any case that was a nice catch and keen eye IMPREPREX...

Map of Azimuth Centers of Sol 365 MC100 Frames:


2-D MC100 Sol 365 Pano with Azimuth Lines:


Anaglyph MC34-MC100 Pano with Azimuth Lines:


Anaglyph MC34-MC100 Pano without Azimuth Lines:


MC 34 Sol 364 Pano of Area in Question:

Sol 365 - Navcam 360 Anaglyph...

Sol 363 - Navcam 360 Anaglyph...

GOING DEEP on Mt. Sharp...

Long drives and big panoramas equal nice wide stereo baselines. Here's a 16,220 x 1,250 pixel anaglyph of Mt. Sharp, with the Sol 344 MC 34 pano (left channel) and the Sol352 MC 34 pano (right channel) providing a surprisingly deep 3D look at the mountain and its approaches. The basline separation is about 260 meters; enough offset to actually make out a number of features on the upper slopes of Mt. Sharp in reasonably good stereo. The near foregrounds of course do not match in the least. Both the default and a slightly level enhanced (for a bit better detail in washed out areas but slightly darker overall) versions are below.

For the first time I noticed several features on the slopes of Mt. Sharp I hadn't seen before or viewed with any kind of reasonable clarity, in stereo anyway. About half way up the slope, a bit right of center, where the tilted layers of the formation that dominates of the entire right side of the mountain peter out onto the central slope there appear to be two large flat "terraces" with rounded edges. They almost look like the remants of a massive landslide that left two large folds on the slope. There are some large "pinnacles" scattered about the slope to the left of these terraces, and at the upper left, just below the summit, a prominant row of massive cliffs (that almost appear to have layered strata) can be nicely seen too. Of special interest are the various mesas, buttes, and broken terrain scattered about the dune field toward our direction of travel at the right side of the image. The Sol 344 pano wasn't completely imaged on the right side (dang it) but I left the right channel counterpart visible for reference.

Default:


Detail Enhanced:


Edit: Looks as if those terraces I mentioned are the two most northerly elements of the large tilted "light-toned yardangs" (from Anderson & Bell) formation. From our vantage point we see mostly the western half (East-West trending) of these. These two on the other hand appear to be the upper most elements of the other side (NE-SW trending) of the formation:

SOL 361 - Navcam 360 Anaglyph. Some interesting terrain around here for sure. That circular formation a bit to the left of the UHF antenna is a rather curious feature...

Sol 356 - Navcam 360 Horizonals...

One frame from the left series had a corrupted patch but not a real biggie. Damia's (Ant103) well blended 2-D versions are still superior to mine but until back from Bourgogne or posting again, I figured I'd knock them out as they come in. Have been trying some vignette reduction routines, but still tweaking it...

Anaglyph:


2-D (right side):

Sol 356 - Crossing the dune ripple...

Quick Note: Have updated the Anaglyph and 2-D panoramas from my previous post above to full frame, 360 degrees panos (final 3 Nav frames came in). One Earth Year on Mars. Happy Anniversary to all. Come to think of it, I still have the whole landing night from JPL on the DVR... what a nail biter. Just might have to watch that again tonight. Still gives me goosebumps.

Sol 354 - Quick first look at the new position surroundings (only 9 frames in). Nice dune line in the foreground...

Horizonal Anaglyph:


Full Frame 2-D:


Edit: Remaining Nav frames came in. Updated to full 360 degree (i.e. 12 frame panoramas).
Edit 2: Applied a new anti-vignette routine to smooth out frame transitions while trying to keep the nearly over-exposed centers of frames in check. Still tweaking the process, but liking the results thus far.

Sol 351 - Navcam Panoramas...

Horizonal Anaglyph:


360 Degree 2-D Full Frame:


...and a Sol 344 stereo view of what looks to be (based on the azimuth data and MSL's position at the time) a morning shot at "Twin Cairns Island" before the drive that day...


And yup it's nice to have a few names of some of the terrain features...

FYI Note: Major internet outages with right now (a.m. Aug. 2nd) with Endurance International Group (includes Bluehost my hosting company), so thumbnails from all my posts and downloadable files may be intermittent till they're back up. Millions of people appear to be affected. Grrrr.

Sol 323 Dune Field View Anaglyph - A very nice stereo view of the dune field, pairing the 18 newly arrived MC 34 frames with their MC 100 counterparts, comprising most of the upper section of a 2 row 44 frame pano. Mostly not the direction we're heading now of course, but one of the nicest contiguous stereo views of this area thus far...

Anaglyph at 21,277 x 1400 pixels:


MC 100 2-D - 23,594 x 2368 pixels:


FYI Note: Major internet outages with right now with Endurance International Group (includes Bluehost my hosting company), so thumbnails from all my posts and downloadable files may be intermittent till they're back up. Millions of people are affected. Grrrr.

Sol 349 - 360 Degree Navcam Panoramas...

Horizonal Anaglyph:


2-D Full Frame:

...or even very high velocity first impact crater sites whose surrounding material has been eroded away by many eons of wind? Several of the rocky mounds in this area look somewhat rounded in appearance in the HIRISE images. So could the hillocks themselves, with their dark rocky boulders, simply be remnants of a once buried but highly compacted crater center, where the ground was super heated by the intense impact, leaving heavily compressed ground (the mounds) and dark rocky impact debris (the boulders) that have since resisted the erosional forces that subsequently removed all evidence of the once overlying craters themselves? Not sure how old they'd have to be for that much erosion to have occurred, but it's a thought anyway.

And yup, we're traveling again...Sol 349 Rear Hazcam Anaglyphs. Gives a clue as to the direction maybe.

Both Sol 347 Navcam Panoramas in this post updated to full 360 degree views, this 5 panel section of which deserves its own full frames view in anaglyph...

Sol 347 Anaglyphs... Check out the rock the left wheels came over in the rear hazcam view. Almost looks as if the wheels dug in behind it a bit during the push....

Hazcam Front:


Hazcam Rear:


...and a 360 degree Navcam 12-frame horizonal anaglyph:


...and a 2-D (full frames) view:


Edit 1 : 2 more frames from the Sol 347 Navcam panorama came in and were added to the right side. The right side view is really fetching with the crater rim off in the distance, especially in 3-D.
Edit 2: Additional 3 frames to the Sol 347 Navcam panorama to complete a 360 degree view.

Sol 345 Navcam Anaglyph - 5 frames this time....


...and a Sol 344 four frame MC 34 panorama.

...and the Sol 344 horizonal anaglyph. Nice view of that rocky knoll at right now. Still no sign of the backshell over in that direction but at this distance it might not even be visible when we round that knoll if it's in a depression. We'll see. Based on Phil's Sol 344 route map position, a GM measurement now puts it at about 550 meters almost directly on the other side of that knoll (and just a little to the left of it actually). Wonder what kind of material is so white in that knoll at center left? (For those following along I only render the upper half of the navcam frames for these horizonal views as it expediates the channel alignment routine while still providing a good sense of the surrounding terrain.)