Perijove 1 (PJ1), August 27, 2016 |
Perijove 1 (PJ1), August 27, 2016 |
Sep 2 2016, 04:45 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
New images released!
And raw images at various processing levels from PJ1 are now in the JunoCam gallery. -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Sep 20 2016, 11:03 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
Regarding
QUOTE One question I do have - in VFX we often shoot a checkerboard/grid pattern in order to test/view the distortion that is present in a given lens. I was wondering if any such images were taken for Junocam/if that’s a common part of your process, too? You may be interested in the JunoCam Calibration Report. Although I don't know, whether the referenced files are publicly accessible. Preliminary geometric calibration data are provided in the JunoCam paper, subsection 4.7. Although the residuals beyond Brownian K1 haven't yet been expressed in algebraic form. For the outer part of the JunoCam images I'm inclined to add at least a small Brownian K2, but that's still not quite perfect. I'm also not quite sure, whether the Brownian way to describe lense distortions is the best one, since it's essentially a Taylor polynomial, which tend to oscillate heavily when of higher order. You may also like to take a look into the pdf, I've provided in May this year, as an introduction of which challenges to expect for JunoCam image processing. I've done some calibration experiments with stars in cruise images. You'll find some of those attempts in the Juno PDS thread. The BSC star catalog can serve as a reference image in this case. It's necessary, however, to understand time delay integration (TDI) for the long-exposure images. My humble attempts to describe and understand straylight and interline smear can be found in a respective dedicated thread. This is far from completed, but currently processing of the Jupiter images is of higher priority. Thanks for scoring my processing of the above image higher. But if you take a look into the provided pdf articles in these threads, you'll know, why I'm scoring my PJ1 image enhancement experiments low in comparison, at least regarding the level of my portion of accomplished technical challenges. -- I'd think, continuing detailed technical discussions about camera calibration with means other than PJ1 images would be better-suited in the respective threads. |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd June 2024 - 04:31 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. |