Fixed now.

The Duck Bay pan so far...



James

I'm glad someone was paying attention.

I'll fix it when I get a chance.

The first little bit of the Duck Bay pan is down.



James

OK Mike, I'll promise stop making comparisons if you promise to keep MGS/MOC turned on.

It's been mentioned around here already that the HiRISE images are so amazing, and so far above what we expected, because of the much lower noise level rather than the increase in resolution when compared to MOC.

Here's a quick demonstration of this:

Victoria, Cape D1 and boulder field below.


Beagle, Waco & Beta Craters & Jesse Chisholm.


Far left is the HiRISE image and far right is the best cPROTO MOC image. Second from the left shows the HiRISE image reduced down to 1/3 resolution to get something similar to the MOC resolution. As you can see this would still have been jaw dropping. I have to add a whole stack of noise to this (3rd from left) to get something with about the same visiblity of features as in the MOC image.

James

New version using the HiRise image (at half resolution).



(Click image for larger version, 344kB)

James

Cool.

Nope. That 959 hazcam is the *penultimate* one not the end of drive one. There was no bump yestersol.

James

Which we do.

Here's what Oppy sees from the side compared with what HiRise sees from above.



James

EDIT: Note that the HiRise is reduced down to approximately match the navcam resolution - I can't wait for the pancams!

I've examined the recent images and I can't see any movement at all for Spirit.

I think it's it pretty fair to say that this will definitely be about Oppy.

James

Which reminds me, time for another far rim vs MOC image comparison.



I've used yestersols (958) navcams as tosols arn't complete yet -the only real difference is that tosol Cape D1 can be seen beyond the beacon.

With a bit of luck come tomorrow we may have a better orbital image.

James

Let me make sure I've got this right, this is at 11am EDT on Friday right? 4 hours behind UTC, so 1500?

That's 1am saturday morning here on AEST, looks like it'll be a late night!

No worries Ted.

Good point about the saturation - I had played with it, but will do some more. I have a few tricks to try out.

James

That's what I'm doing Ted, see the first post.

I generally use a=b=c=0 but I often optimise for d & e (x & y shift) when doing manual stitching. I couldn't tell you if these come out similar each time or what values thay take however.

James

That's right, similar to what other have done colouring MI's using pancam images.



I don't think that really improves things, your not really gaining any colour resolution as the green and blue channels that make the colour are still at the lower resolution. And you end up effectively loosing spacial resolution as now two channels containing the low resolution data dominate over the higher red channel.

Another issue is simplicity for me. I have some quite sophisicated routines that i've developed over the last year for making nice colour pans that work on individual pancam pointings (plus knowledge of how they fit together) not on the whole pan. So just adding the green and blue to a red navcam results in some serious colour gradients.

Here is a simple attempt at this showing the problems,





The navcams arn't that bad. I didn't take any into account doing this.

I think the biggest problem is that the navcam isn't in the same position as the pancam so at close range you end up with a small stereo effect. It's more evident in the 'navcams in red channel' attempt in this post (another problem with it!), in fact that image may work as an anaglyph! (Probably the wrong way around, left pancam is to the left of the left navcam so the pancams should be red (i think), you'll have to turn the glasses around. I don't have my glasses to check)

EDIT: Cross post with Mike - glad we agree

James

I've put my reply on how that was made in a new thread

James

A preview of the Duck Bay panorama.
















Your all on the right track but not quite there.

To make this I took the thumbnails (64x64 each) from the tracking site and used the tracking data to create a Hugin pan file. (Note the rover quaternian appears a little off in the database at the moment so the horizon isn't flat.)

Then I ran my normal image matching / colouring software on the pan/images to create a full colour mini panorama.



This however has a much lower resolution than the existing navcams, so the next step is to use the pan as a colour layer over the navcam pan (also made using the tracking data so the two match in geometry.)

Then as Fred says, I cut out (poorly, must try harder next time.) just the coloured region from the navcam pan to retain the 'feel' of a pancam pan.



The good news is most of this happens automatically in my software, so you can all expect prompt 'preview' panoramas in the future before the full images are even downlinked from the rover.

James

A preview of the Duck Bay panorama.



Oops, wrong version - fixed.

James.

FYI: Driving again tosol (957)

Reply from Bob.

Great work.

By the way, that image has almost exactly the same field of view as the 'Duck Bay' pan. A nice preview of what's to come.

James

I've posted your message onto the UMSF Yahoo backup which I know Bob subscribes to.

Sol 955 Route map.



James