Juno perijove 9, October 24, 2017, near solar conjunction |
Juno perijove 9, October 24, 2017, near solar conjunction |
Nov 3 2017, 12:33 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
It's time to start a new topic for Juno's Perijove-09.
Due to solar conjunction, data downlink is delayed several days, but things appear to look good thus far. Data downlink started on October 31, and if everything continues well, it should be a matter of a few days, at most, until the majority of the raw Perijove-09 images will become available. Due to the incremented available storage for JunoCam, we may get a sufficient coverage to render a pole to pole -- well, almost pole to pole -- fly-over reconstruction, despite the difficult communication near solar conjunction. I'll have a try at least, over the next few weeks. |
|
|
Dec 15 2017, 12:06 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2346 Joined: 7-December 12 Member No.: 6780 |
In order to remove most of the greenish cast, I've been using 0.88 for red since PJ-06 for enhanced images. But this might undergo another refinement later.
In general, I'm not sure, whether there is a fixed "how to". It depends on your purpose. I've written almost 10 MB of code for various purposes of JunoCam image processing and related tasks, almost everything from scratch. Might be the code could be shortened to 5 MB with sufficient effort in "refactoring", but I've still a long list of TBDs after four years of development. I might double the code next year in order to cover some of the items on the (ambitious) list. I'm interested in developing and understanding all technical detail about camera calibration, processing, data reduction, evaluation, and beyond, independent of possibly existing partial solutions, but that's probably not the recommended way for people, who just like to create beautiful images, nor for professionals who need to reduce specific project costs and risks. The semantics of the code overlaps with that of NAIF/SPICE and ISIS3. So, if you are happy with "the standard", you might consider to base your work on these libraries and tool sets. The JunoCam extension for ISIS3 is work in progress since quite a while, and might be released next year, for those who are used to work with ISIS3 in a UNIX environment. Regarding threads, I guess, that Candy would be happy to learn about possible extensions of the missionjuno website. One of her primary objectives is "Science in a Fishbowl", as far as that's possible without running into science publication or privacy issues. "Evaluating JunoCam images with ISIS3" might become one of the considered topics. |
|
|
Dec 15 2017, 05:56 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 13-November 17 Member No.: 8284 |
The code I developed was for a computational photography course, so for a variety of reasons I used only related methods. So I only did 2d alignment methods to register the framelets, which turned out OK but obviously was not perfect. It seemed like I would just be able to find the homographies for perfect framelet alignment but I wasn't able to get acceptable/consistent results doing it. I was hoping to be able to open source the code for people to play around with but I need to check guidelines related to the class first.
The Juno Software Interface Specification document says they perform a white balancing such that a white surface has a value of 10000. (For planetary targets). I did not attempt to implement this. I was thinking that a thread that could summarize information about the spacecraft and specifically the instruments (including junocam) would be useful. It could encompass "official" pipelines as well as unofficial ones by giving enough data to help people implement it themselves or modify existing code. For example, originally I wanted to try to visualize data from JIRAM or MWR and merge them with junocam imagery. I have a list of links to a variety of documents and posts that could be helpful to start. Also, were the flat fields ever released? I found mention of them in the calibration report but could never actually find them. |
|
|
Dec 16 2017, 04:11 PM
Post
#4
|
|||
Senior Member Group: Members Posts: 2542 Joined: 13-September 05 Member No.: 497 |
I have a list of links to a variety of documents and posts that could be helpful to start. If you want to post that or start a new thread it seems completely reasonable. It could go in http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8143 or http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8353 -- the latter is misplaced IMHO because "Image Processing Techniques" is intended to be non-mission-specific. QUOTE Also, were the flat fields ever released? I found mention of them in the calibration report but could never actually find them. As I've said previously, the flat field is more complex than just putting up an image. Our ground flat fields consist of readouts of the entire active part of the sensor, only 128-line pieces of which per filter are sent down in flight. And then with TDI active the image moves across the sensor and blurs out the blemishes. All of this could be documented in a self-contained fashion, but I just haven't had the time. I've attached a normalized 8-bit version of the flat (IIRC this appears as a figure in the Junocam paper) and a binary blemish map of the RGB part of the sensor that gets read out (the latter is what we are currently using in our processing flow to repair blemishes, but it's fairly quick-and-dirty.) -------------------- Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
|
||
|
|||
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 27th September 2024 - 02:45 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. |