Martian Cartography |
Martian Cartography |
May 15 2006, 04:16 PM
Post
#101
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 147 Joined: 14-April 06 From: Berlin Member No.: 744 |
I have recently freaked out a little bit about Martian maps of all sorts. And finally I was astonished with those highly detailed beauties that I list below. Nonetheless. some of them have huge inconsistencies (crater names) easily noticed when we compare the surroundings of Gusev crater. Enjoy:
http://www.ralphaeschliman.com/ http://planetologia.elte.hu/1cikkeke.phtml...arsmapinte.html http://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/i2782/ -------------------- |
|
|
Mar 13 2021, 11:20 PM
Post
#102
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 248 Joined: 25-February 21 From: Waltham, Massachussetts, U.S.A. Member No.: 8974 |
https://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/data/msl/M...CES_PDS_SIS.PDF
section 3.9.2 has a discussion on easting which I think provides a start of an explanation: " These “easting” meters at a given latitude are related to true meters at the equator by the simple formula: map_meters = true_meters / cos(φ) where φ is the planetocentric latitude. " [ hey, one can use html entities in the forum ♥ https://www.w3schools.com/html/html_symbols.asp ] It looks like the provided meters are true meters (at the equator) and the projected easting has map meters since: 4590298.31635 = 4354494.086 / cos(18.4446271 degrees) This is getting closer to 4590877.824, with still ca. 580m of a difference. The gdal computed easting assumes a sphere with a radius of 3396190 m. Perhaps the reported true meter easting takes into account a local radius because these are also listed in the geojson, in the radius field. The gdal computed easting and northing is consistent with the simple formulas given in section 4.4.2.4: " planetocentric_latitude: Latitude of the point, measured using a planetocentric system. Planetocentric coordinates are measured as angles from the center of the planet. Latitude (φ_pc) is computed from northing (x) using the formula: φ_pc = x / Re • 180 / PI where Re is the ellipsoid radius, or 3396190 meters. longitude: Longitude of the point. Longitude is computed from easting (y) using the formula: θ = y / Re • 180 / PI " [ This is good and so simple that I can probably directly plot the traverse geojson on my equirectangular basemap ]. Since the northing matches, Re is 3396190 m. In addition to the correction to true meters from map meters easting, something else seems to be done to the easting. But what ? -------------------- --
Andreas Plesch, andreasplesch at gmail dot com |
|
|
Mar 14 2021, 05:13 AM
Post
#103
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 10-August 12 Member No.: 6526 |
4590298.31635 = 4354494.086 / cos(18.4446271 degrees) This is getting closer to 4590877.824, with still ca. 580m of a difference. Solving for the latitude using the target easting we get: 18.46629998 = acos(4354494.086 / 4590877.824) degrees Curiously, this number shows up as the center latitude of an orthographic projection in this metadata file. The relevant snippet is this: CODE <mapproj> <mapprojn>Orthographic</mapprojn> <equirect> <stdparll>18.4663</stdparll> <longcm>77.4298</longcm> <feast>0.0</feast> <fnorth>0.0</fnorth> </equirect> </mapproj> The TIFF file this refers to is described on this page as the Derived JPL Surface Operations Mosaic: QUOTE Derived JPL Surface Operations Mosaic: This mosaic was finalized at JPL specifically for surface operations and mapping. It use the same individual images provide here but optimized for visual purposes using slightly differing seamlines and a 120 pixel blend across the input images. It uses an orthographic map projection centered on the landing site (77.4298 Lon, 18.4663 Lat). Download GeoTIFF (3.2 GB LZW compressed) Thanks for bringing this up because it looks likes this may have solved a problem I've been working on, too. Mark |
|
|
Mar 14 2021, 09:03 PM
Post
#104
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 248 Joined: 25-February 21 From: Waltham, Massachussetts, U.S.A. Member No.: 8974 |
... The TIFF file this refers to is described on this page as the Derived JPL Surface Operations Mosaic: Glad we arrived at the same conclusion (at the same time !). I am using the TIFF you linked to as my base map. Confusingly, the geotiff embedded projection does have 0 as the Latitude of the 1st standard parallel, somewhat contrary to the description which mentions 'centering' on the landing ellipse: Unknown CRS: PROJCRS["Equirectangular Mars 2000 Sphere IAU",BASEGEOGCRS["D_Mars_2000_Sphere",DATUM["Mars_2000_(Sphere)",ELLIPSOID["Mars_2000_Sphere_IAU",3396190,0,LENGTHUNIT["metre",1]],ID["ESRI",106971]],PRIMEM["Reference_Meridian",0,ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433,ID["EPSG",9122]]]],CONVERSION["Equidistant Cylindrical",METHOD["Equidistant Cylindrical",ID["EPSG",1028]],PARAMETER["Latitude of 1st standard parallel",0,ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433],ID["EPSG",8823]],PARAMETER["Longitude of natural origin",0,ANGLEUNIT["degree",0.0174532925199433],ID["EPSG",8802]],PARAMETER["False easting",0,LENGTHUNIT["metre",1],ID["EPSG",8806]],PARAMETER["False northing",0,LENGTHUNIT["metre",1],ID["EPSG",8807]]],CS[Cartesian,2],AXIS["easting",east,ORDER[1],LENGTHUNIT["metre",1,ID["EPSG",9001]]],AXIS["northing",north,ORDER[2],LENGTHUNIT["metre",1,ID["EPSG",9001]]]] - Projected And I do think the image data is supposed to be used with that 0 latitude projection because the ISIS .lbl and PDS .lbl also do not specify a standard parallel away from the equator. It would be possible to reproject (or gdalwarp) the mosaic to the off-equator equirectangular projection and that would yield a less distorted map more appropriate for the region. In effect, it would mean squeezing the x dimension by about 5.15%. But I do not think I am going to do that because it introduces some data loss compared to the existing mosaic. -------------------- --
Andreas Plesch, andreasplesch at gmail dot com |
|
|
Mar 15 2021, 07:17 AM
Post
#105
|
|
Junior Member Group: Members Posts: 31 Joined: 10-August 12 Member No.: 6526 |
Glad we arrived at the same conclusion (at the same time !). I am using the TIFF you linked to as my base map. Confusingly, the geotiff embedded projection does have 0 as the Latitude of the 1st standard parallel, somewhat contrary to the description which mentions 'centering' on the landing ellipse: There are two images referenced on that page. The primary image and subject of that page is the equirectangular projection prepared by the USGS: JEZ_hirise_soc_006_orthoMosaic_25cm_Eqc_latTs0_lon0_first.tif I agree, the metadata seems to indicate that the 0.25 meters/pixel applies to the equator: CODE Group = Mapping TargetName = Mars EquatorialRadius = 3396190.0 <meters> PolarRadius = 3396190.0 <meters> LatitudeType = Planetocentric LongitudeDirection = PositiveEast LongitudeDomain = 180 MinimumLatitude = 18.3067994496865651 MinimumLongitude = 77.2229330769714153 MaximumLatitude = 18.6693150068777456 MaximumLongitude = 77.5839640209350847 ProjectionName = Equirectangular CenterLongitude = 0.0 CenterLatitude = 0.0 CenterLatitudeRadius = 3396190.0 UpperLeftCornerX = 4577366.0 UpperLeftCornerY = 1106618.0 PixelResolution = 0.25 <meters/pixel> Scale = 237098.790093224874 <pixels/degree> End_Group The following relations hold: UpperLeftCornerX = MinimumLongitude * Scale * PixelResolution UpperLeftCornerY = MaximumLatitude * Scale * PixelResolution Scale = EquatorialRadius (or PolarRadius or CenterLatitudeRadius) * 2 * Pi / PixelResolution / 360 So, UpperLeftCornerX appears to be an easting based on the equator and not what the JPL operations team is using in the M20_waypoints.json feed. At our latitude of interest (~18.4663 degrees), the horizontal resolution becomes 0.25*cos(18.4663) = 0.237 meters/pixel. So the pixels aren't quite square. It seems desirable to use easting and northing "meters" that are close to equal where you'll be driving your rover so that's where this image comes in: JEZ_hirise_soc_007_orthoMosaic_25cm_Ortho_blend120.tif An orthographic projection centered on the target landing site (77.4298 Lon, 18.4663 Lat) where "meters" are nearly equal around the landing site. I suppose they chose orthographic projection (over equirectangular) because any distortion in "meters" as you move from the center of projection will apply to both easting and northing in a symmetrical manner instead of just one dimension as you would have with an equirectangular projection. The second image seems to be superior from what I've seen, so in order to use it for Google Earth tiles, I'll have to resample it with something like bicubic interpolation to obtain an equirectangular projection with center latitude of 18.4663 degrees. QUOTE It would be possible to reproject (or gdalwarp) the mosaic to the off-equator equirectangular projection and that would yield a less distorted map more appropriate for the region. In effect, it would mean squeezing the x dimension by about 5.15%. But I do not think I am going to do that because it introduces some data loss compared to the existing mosaic .I'm sure there's already been a little squeezing (and stretching) here and there in order to get these projections from the original HiRISE images, so what's a little more? Mark |
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th September 2024 - 06:03 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. |