MEX VMC - Back on, and online! |
MEX VMC - Back on, and online! |
Aug 22 2008, 01:58 PM
Post
#101
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14433 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I heard about this 24 hours ago, and couldn't believe it - this is EXACTLY what has been missing from ESA. MASSIVE kudos to the ESOC MEX flight ops team for doing it
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/VMC/index.html The last time I wrote a post and hit 'submit' at UMSF with a smile this big on my face, was when Oppy successfully got out of Purgatory. |
|
|
Nov 25 2009, 11:26 PM
Post
#102
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14433 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
I wonder if by virtue of imaging far closer to mars, on more featureless areas, possibly during dust storms - we might be able to generate a flatfield of some sort.
I'm also wondering if it's worth suggesting to the VMC team that they could well avoid the four different exposure settings, stick with the 2nd of the 4, typically, and either quarter the downlink, quadruple the frame rate, or quadruple the observation duration. There seems to be a pattern of one under exposed, one slightly over exposed and one saturated image for every well exposed image. It's not like we're going to be pulling HDR images out of this stuff. If we can then constrain observations to that one exposure setting - then we can have just one dark field image, one flat field image, and be much better equipped to process the images. |
|
|
Nov 26 2009, 08:40 AM
Post
#103
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 3648 Joined: 1-October 05 From: Croatia Member No.: 523 |
I wonder if by virtue of imaging far closer to mars, on more featureless areas, possibly during dust storms - we might be able to generate a flatfield of some sort. Also, such an observation would probably best be carried out as a rapid-fire, single exposure setting sequence letting Mars slide underneath and capturing as many frames as possible. A dust storm or even high cloud cover would be perfect. QUOTE If we can then constrain observations to that one exposure setting - then we can have just one dark field image, one flat field image, and be much better equipped to process the images. I was thinking two best exposed images and leaving the one or two underexposed ones out. What I imagine the team has problems with is using generic exposure settings for all observations as Mars' surface is backscattering and its brightness varies with phase angle. The several exposure settings are probably just safeguards against severe over/under-exposure -------------------- |
|
|
Nov 26 2009, 09:04 AM
Post
#104
|
|
Founder Group: Chairman Posts: 14433 Joined: 8-February 04 Member No.: 1 |
Also, such an observation would probably best be carried out as a rapid-fire, single exposure setting sequence letting Mars slide underneath and capturing as many frames as possible. Bingo - we then sum the frames ( slightly under-exposed ones ) any features cancel themselves out- and we have a flatfield. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 8th June 2024 - 08:09 PM |
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. |