MOM archival data |
MOM archival data |
Sep 25 2016, 07:47 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Solar System Cartographer Group: Members Posts: 10193 Joined: 5-April 05 From: Canada Member No.: 227 |
MOM first year data released.... I'm still waiting to be approved, but others may like to check it out.
http://www.isro.gov.in/pslv-c25-mars-orbit...on-mom-released Phil -------------------- ... because the Solar System ain't gonna map itself.
Also to be found posting similar content on https://mastodon.social/@PhilStooke Maps for download (free PD: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Cartography.pdf NOTE: everything created by me which I post on UMSF is considered to be in the public domain (NOT CC, public domain) |
|
|
Oct 6 2016, 11:46 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Administrator Group: Admin Posts: 5172 Joined: 4-August 05 From: Pasadena, CA, USA, Earth Member No.: 454 |
OK, the entire dataset is now available here. I zipped every image to save on bandwidth consumption. Blog entry about it here.
I downloaded the "level 3" data, which is demosaicked and allegedly calibrated. I'm very curious to find out if different demosaicking methods produce sharper results. Here is one image (the global view with the Tharsis montes and Valles Marineris), in its raw format, and here is its label. Can any of you do better than the mission's version, which used bilinear interpolation for demosaicking? -------------------- My website - My Patreon - @elakdawalla on Twitter - Please support unmannedspaceflight.com by donating here.
|
|
|
Oct 8 2016, 01:43 AM
Post
#3
|
|||
IMG to PNG GOD Group: Moderator Posts: 2251 Joined: 19-February 04 From: Near fire and ice Member No.: 38 |
Can any of you do better than the mission's version, which used bilinear interpolation for demosaicking? Somewhat disappointingly, this comparison seems to be difficult or impossible since inspection of the images reveals that the official images (both the 16 and 32 bit versions) have also had additional processing applied to them. In particular, they have been smoothed, possibly flatfielded and I suspect the brightness may have been adjusted with a (slightly) nonlinear stretch. Here is a crop showing a comparison between the official version (top) and a version I did using IMG2PNG to output a debayered image using adaptive smooth hue (bottom) for demosaicking. The bottom version looks sharper but it's also a lot more noisy. This is especially clear if the images are sharpened. I will be releasing a new version of IMG2PNG that handles these images properly tomorrow (Saturday). |
||
|
|||
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18th June 2024 - 06:36 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. |