Mercury mosaics from January 2008 Flyby |
Mercury mosaics from January 2008 Flyby |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderator Posts: 3234 Joined: 11-February 04 From: Tucson, AZ Member No.: 23 ![]() |
The raw data from MESSENGER's January 14, 2008 flyby of the planet Mercury are now online on NASA Planetary Data Service's website:
http://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/data/messe...grmds_1001_new/ As such, I am proud to present a series of mosaics I have created using these raw images. These use the mosaic designs shown on the MESSENGER project's Mercury Flyby 1 Visualization Tool webpage. These mosaics were created in either Photoshop CS3 (using the Photomerge tool) or PTGui Pro (particularly for the two MASSIVE mosaics). Keep in mind that these mosaics are quite large in most cases, and it may be better just to right-click and save them to your hard drive to view them separately, rather than viewing them in your browser. -------------------- &@^^!% Jim! I'm a geologist, not a physicist!
The Gish Bar Times - A Blog all about Jupiter's Moon Io |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 1649 Joined: 5-March 05 From: Boulder, CO Member No.: 184 ![]() |
Does anyone happen to know the distance of Messenger from Mercury when these hi-res mosaics were made? What I'm getting at would be the "equivalent" distance of the projection used in making the mosaics, if this is something like the average distance of the range stated in VP's post. This would be nice to check on as I'm testing this mosaic now in my map.
Also, are we seeing all the way to the limb in this projection? Thanks Steve |
|
|
![]()
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Senior Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 ![]() |
Which mosaic are you talking about, Steve? I know the global color mosaic I did uses the NAC mosaic #4, the last outbound mosaic. It was overlaid onto the last WAC global color shot and so it effectively mimics that viewpoint apart from the extreme limb to the right. There's some severely distorted terrain there which was not visible in the earlier wide-angle so it couldn't fit the global image. As a result I'd say on average something up to 100-200 pixels on the right limb can't be trusted. The south and north poles should be about right, but with a bit of distortion as well. The center portion of the disc ought to fit reasonably well.
-------------------- |
|
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th June 2024 - 10:23 AM |
RULES AND GUIDELINES Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting. IMAGE COPYRIGHT |
OPINIONS AND MODERATION Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators. |
SUPPORT THE FORUM Unmannedspaceflight.com is funded by the Planetary Society. Please consider supporting our work and many other projects by donating to the Society or becoming a member. |
![]() |