Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 20 2006, 06:05 PM

First, there's a landing site overview (full version 152 KB).

Spirit on Sol 6:
http://xs69.xs.to/pics/06081/Sol_6_Spirit_Sol_16_bw.jpg

Posted by: dilo Feb 20 2006, 08:44 PM

Beautiful, bluescape.
Results could be even better in terms of lighting/shadows, but realism is already good.

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 20 2006, 10:45 PM

Shadowing is really important for these sort of images.
It 'attaches' the Rover to the ground/environment.
Little details help as well... for instance, the IDD shouldn't be extended at this stage.
For realism, it could be deleted from the original image or redrawn in stow position.

For some of the SFX images that I've played with I've had to rely on various images of the Rover taken from a variety of sources. What we really need to do all this properly is a high quality 3-D mesh (wireframe) of the MERs with realistic colours and textures available.

If anyone knows of such that can be downloaded for FREE, then let me know.
There are a few meshes available for purchase online, but I'm not solvent enough to spare a few hundred dollars on them.

It would be really nice to produce a coffee table book or online gallery for all of these SFX images.
I think Aldo12xu has suggested an online repository...how about it?

Can I suggest too that if UMSF'ers want to post these SFX images (and I'm all for it) that from now on we post only thumbnails (following jamescanvin's lead) and host the images elsewhere and that way we don't take up too much of Doug's server/bandwidth.

Just a few thoughts.
Astro0

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 21 2006, 12:44 PM

Thought I better put my money where my mouth is and produce a version of this image.

Full size image on my https://astro0.wordpress.com/sfx-images/
I hope that there are some other MER SFX'ers out there who would like to contribute.
SigurRosFan and I are having fun and, at least from my point of view, it fills the void while we wait for Exploratorium to catch up.

Enjoy
Astro0

Posted by: Tesheiner Feb 21 2006, 01:07 PM

Me too!

OT: This image of Spirit reminds me of the MER Team concerns with "getting down from the lander on this or that size" due to the airbags. Now, with all those 750 sols on the back, compare this manouver with the almost "rock climb" she did to go to the top of HP.

What a difference.

Posted by: aldo12xu Feb 21 2006, 03:31 PM

Awesome work, Astro & Nico! Including the rover really brings the photos to life. And, yeah, I have tons of bandwidth (which I thought I'd need for all my videos) so I'd be more than happy to host a Special FX page, with proper credit given to each artist, of course

Posted by: Oersted Feb 22 2006, 12:08 AM

Ok, a few small points of criticism. I think you should have made the shadows darker and sharper. Just behind the rear wheel of the rover you see a shadow on the lander. I know the distance is a bit longer from the rover top deck to the lander, but I'd expect basically a shadow that sharp and that dark. Another thing: I think the solar panels are far too blue, compared to the sky above them. I think you should reflect the sky colour more on the solar arrays.

Great work, hope you don't mind my constructive criticism!

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 22 2006, 02:27 AM

Love the criticism!
These things can always be done better. The shadows are the hardest to get right.
I think I was basically reflecting the look of the shadows you can see on the surface from the egress ramps.
I debated the look for a while in Photoshop and that's what came out.

I got a tip on another thread about a 3DS model of the Rover that I think I can adapt and use in some nifty software that I've puchased and that way I will be able to incorporate the MERs into scenes with much better shadowing, etc.

Thanks for the ideas.
Astro0

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 22 2006, 05:05 PM

I know these details, but ... somewhen. Now, I would try to cover the tracks.

Small critical: Your rover is slightly to small. Spirit's size in my SFX image is more accurate.

Btw: Special thanks to Tman!

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 23 2006, 12:49 AM

Actually, looking back at images of the Rover while still in the lab and later images before rolling off the lander, I think the truth lays somewhere in between our two images. Also, the model we are using has too much perspective for this image and means that the position of the wheels is out of alignment.

Looking at the full-scale replica of the Rover from JPL that we have at our Deep Space Complex, I think there are a few scale issues with the 3D model as well, eg: camera mast a little too thin, camera head not high enough, and front wheel supports a bit short - only small variations, but enough to make producing an accurate image difficult.

I'm going to have another go at this particular shot and make a few improvements as suggested by others above. Now that I have the 3D mesh model and some other image references on file I think I can look forward to producing even better composite images.

I think however that the bottom line on all this discussion is very simple...
"We are having fun as artists and enjoying the journey of these two incredible vehicles and their proud 'parents' back here on Earth."

Astro0

Posted by: climber Feb 23 2006, 01:14 AM

Yeah, very nice job but perfectible : as compared to the lander, she still looks like she comes .... from another planet

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 23 2006, 05:17 PM

Yeah, without tracks ...

Opportunity on Sol 17 (144 KB):
http://xs69.xs.to/pics/06084/Sol_17_Opportunity_Sol_23.jpg

Posted by: djellison Feb 23 2006, 06:22 PM

Needs shadows - but they're cool

If you do a drop shadow in photoshop, then make a layer from it, you can then warp / perspective / distort to make the shadow appear to cast in the right direction as based on other shadows in the scene

Doug

Posted by: climber Feb 23 2006, 07:38 PM

I'm still struggling to create decent picture myself. I was wondering if anybody has thought to create pictures were NIGHT will ne simulated by reducing light in the scenary, the rover, the sky, and putting REAL night sky (we could use pictures of Earth's night sky) and we could even show the Earth in the sky. Will be cool eh?

Posted by: Bill Harris Feb 23 2006, 07:38 PM

I'm building a 1/4 scale Rover and the more I look closely at photos of it, the more fine details keep popping out at me. And the more familiar I become with the Rovers the more discrepancies I see in the 3-D models. This is not to be critical, this is FWIW. You can't take a 3-D object, make a 2-D representation of it and make that 2-D look 3-D.

--Bill

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 23 2006, 09:36 PM

Photoshop? Which version?

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 24 2006, 12:41 AM

Photoshop versions from LE to CS2.
Look under 'Window/Layers' in the menubar.

Also...
I agree with Bill Harris about 2D vs 3D, that why I'm going to work on taking a digital 3D MER model and integrating that into some of my future SFX images.
Very much looking forward to seeing your 1/4 scale model. I hope that your going to then put out detailed construction plans so we can all make one.

Astro0

Posted by: Bill Harris Feb 24 2006, 01:09 AM

I'm keeping notes of the Rover project, but they'll be a bear to pull together into coherent plans. I'm planning plans some day. The most challenging aspect is doing the detailing: there are a gazillion wires, connectors and do-dads on this vehicle. It's not impossible, one just needs to work in layers, from the inside out.

The thread, http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=2000, is still in Tech, General and Imagery. I'm currently plateau'd with the basic form of the body and solar cells/panels, so not much has been reported.

--Bill

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 24 2006, 06:40 PM

Whoa! Only 300 Euro for the CS2 upgrade.

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 26 2006, 10:10 AM

Nice scene ... Challenger Memorial Station, Airbag Marks, Stone Mountain and beyond Eagle: Endurance, Heat Shield and Bounce Rock.

And no tracks ...

Another Opportunity on Sol 17 (172 KB):
http://xs69.xs.to/pics/06080/Sol_17_Opportunity_Sol_33.jpg

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 27 2006, 12:29 AM

Inspired by bluescape's shots at the Challenger Memorial Station, here's a new SFX image from me of Opportunity leaving Eagle Crater (my first Oppy pic!)

Enjoy
Astro0

This is a small version, a larger version will be on my http://www.zip.com.au/~gjn/MERSFX/indexSFX.html tomorrow.

Posted by: Oersted Feb 27 2006, 12:38 AM

Excellent Astr0!

Esthetically I think it would be good to have a bit more space to the right of the rover and its shadow.

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 27 2006, 09:54 AM

I would say good color. Show us more!

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 27 2006, 10:55 AM

Hmm. I thought about that, but then I felt that having Oppy and its shadow just off the edge would lead your mind to think beyond the edge of the photo...hey, I think it worked. In fact, I could have just used the entire 'Lion King' panorama, but then it's just sooo nice on its own, why add anything to it!


Thanks. I do have a few more Oppy SFX images in mind, just need to find the time between working and sleeping. Too much of one, not enough of the other!

Astro0

Posted by: Bob Shaw Feb 27 2006, 11:39 AM

Here's a heretical thought:

How do we know Eagle Crater was an impact crater, and not another example of an Anatolia?

Bob Shaw

Posted by: djellison Feb 27 2006, 11:45 AM

Not far from perfectly circular
Rasied rim
Similar to many other round-raised-rimed-impactey-type-features.

I don't think the thought that it was anything else would have crossed peoples minds.

Doug

Posted by: Bob Shaw Feb 27 2006, 11:54 AM

Doug:

It's a joy when you set a sand-trap and somebody rolls straight in!

OK, you're right. But tiny craters don't have raised rims in the same ways that big chaps do. And I see no particular evidence of any impactey-type-features other than the circumstantial similarity to say, the Hellas Basin.

And as for the sand-trap - well, it looks awfully like a golf course bunker, doesn't it? Round, full of sand, concave, and a raised rim...

It's said that bunkers were originally naturally occuring features on traditional Scottish 'links' golf courses - features caused by wind erosion, with a weakness in the grassy covering over coastal dunes growing into a pit.

So, once more: how do we know Eagle Crater is an impact feature, and not something else?

Bob Shaw

Posted by: djellison Feb 27 2006, 12:03 PM

Because it looks like one. That's about it. I mean - what do you WANT it to look like to classify it as a crater?

Tiny craters do have raised rims - even Fram had one. A small rise at its rim, but it's a small crater so you'd expect that. Eagle and it's sister a few hundreds meters SW - both appeared as raised rims from a distance.

Tjere are hundreds of thousands of these things around the planet - what makes you think they're NOT craters?
Doug

Posted by: Bob Shaw Feb 27 2006, 12:33 PM

Doug:

It's not that I think they're *not* impact craters, just that I have an open mind about some of the features which we see!

Obviously, Mars is covered with impact craters. Big and small, no problem.

But, at Meridiani, we have seen other sorts of holes in the ground, ranging from the infamous (and dynamically somewhat improbable) mini-craters right up to Anatolia (and perhaps the Payson depression). Fram looked more like a traditional small Lunar crater, to my mind, than does Eagle.

Eagle was characterised as an impact feature *before* we saw the other holes, so the natural assumption was made that it was due to something which fell from the sky. However, there are few bits of direct evidence to support that belief, just habit: round hole = impact crater.

I'm not being contrary for the sake of it - I simply got thinking about holes in the ground, and began to ask myself whether we'd all jumped the gun.

Bob Shaw

Posted by: djellison Feb 27 2006, 12:39 PM

Anatolia is very very different, a linear feature - I wouldnt put any relationship between the way in which Eagle formed and the way Anatolia formed.

When it comes to specific evidence identifying it as a crater - what evidence is there that it ISN'T a crater. There's little more to be said in arguing that it is other than "looks like one" - because that's all the evidence one could expect - there's nothing more one could really bring to the table given the MER payload.

Basically - it looks like one, and nothing suggests it isnt one, and we know Mars is covered in them, so it's fairly safe to say it IS one...isn't it?

Doug

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 27 2006, 12:51 PM

Astro0, would you try to insert a shadow in my last image?

Posted by: dvandorn Feb 28 2006, 02:17 AM

Doug, if you look back about a year or so ago, I believe I was suggesting that Eagle crater may well have been a sinkhole. Ever seen a sinkhole? They're not far from perfectly circular, and they're similar to many other round-impactey-type-features, and if you leave one in a dusty place for a few million years, aeolian deposition will raise an irregular rim around it...

That said, I think the odds of Eagle being an impact crater as opposed to a sinkhole are in the range of 80-20.

-the other Doug

Posted by: Bob Shaw Feb 28 2006, 12:22 PM

oDoug:

I missed that comment first time round!

I agree that Eagle is *probably* an impact crater, but - apart from the points Doug has raised - I've still to see any evidence. Like... ...shocked and deformed layers in the outcrop. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, granted, but there clearly *are* other sorts of holes in the ground around Meridiani, and I'd just like to nail Eagle firmly into the impact camp (or, less likely, otherwise) rather than simply making the obvious asumptions.

Bob Shaw

Posted by: dvandorn Feb 28 2006, 01:55 PM

I just did a quick search, and it was actually nearly two years ago that I made the comment:

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=188&view=findpost&p=916

If we want to keep talking about Meridiani craters being sinkholes vs. impact craters, maybe we ought to move the discussion over to the Opportunity forum...?

-the other Doug

Posted by: Bill Harris Feb 28 2006, 02:05 PM

A sinkhole idea may be do-able, but given that there are many impact features on Mars I'd be inclined to think "impact". But there is something going on-- look at the many anatolia troughs in this area and at chaotic terrain where much of the subsurface has been removed. Let's look a terrestrial aerial photos in karst and arctic permafrost regions and see if we can find examples.

--Bill

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 28 2006, 09:39 PM

Here you go.
Astro0

File: 276k

Posted by: helvick Feb 28 2006, 09:47 PM

Very nice - much better balance in the shading to my eye and the location is very good.

Posted by: SigurRosFan Feb 28 2006, 09:58 PM

Astro0, thank you!! I'm really speechless. It looks so real.

Posted by: dilo Feb 28 2006, 10:03 PM

Must agree! We want more like this!!!

Posted by: Astro0 Feb 28 2006, 10:32 PM

Thanks dilo, SigurRosFan and helvick.
It may sound a bit sad, but actually producing these SFX images is my form of relaxation.
Spending a few hours exploring Gusev or Meridiani and adding this third-person dimension is enormous fun.
I'm glad that others through UMSF can enjoy it as well.

I'd like to suggest that we close this thread here (under Spirit), and perhaps re-open it under 'Tech, General, and Imagery'. Now that we are starting to do Oppy pics as well as Spirit, it doesn't seem the appropriate place. It will also give the SFX'ers a chance to talk technique.

What do you think?
Astro0
http://www.zip.com.au/~gjn/MERSFX/indexSFX.html

Posted by: Nirgal Feb 28 2006, 11:02 PM

this sounds very familiar.
For me too, the (pre)occupation with science in general and Mars in particular, the image processing (including the programming of the tools)
is a form of true relaxation and therapy of an intensity which I otherwise only found in outdoor activities like hiking or snowboarding



hey, this is just a beautiful hobby, there is nothing sad about that

Posted by: Astro0 Mar 1 2006, 12:32 AM

Of course, you're right.
It's not sad, it is beautiful
I now feel much, much better...thanks!

Astro0

Posted by: dilo Mar 1 2006, 12:35 AM

Welcome to IPTG club, guys! (Image Processing Therapy Group)

Posted by: Shaka Mar 1 2006, 01:39 AM

Ciao, Dilo! Have you given your 'beady-eyed' avatar friend from Mars a name yet?

Posted by: dilo Mar 1 2006, 06:37 AM

Eheh, frankly I wonder nobody else thought to use this image (which was posted by Doug)... I think that "Dr SpRock" could be a good name, or we could use the name of the "stone giant" from Never ending Story (sorry, I do not recall it, but someone posted his name some time ago).

Posted by: helvick Mar 1 2006, 07:30 AM

Rockbiter? It's a good likeness -

Posted by: SigurRosFan Mar 1 2006, 12:53 PM

Okay Astro0, would you burn me a CS2 copy?

Nothing is over. I agree with Marco: "We want more like this!!!"

Posted by: Astro0 Mar 1 2006, 01:16 PM

I'm pretty sure you were joking, however, I know that no one on UMSF would support the practice of ever pirating software.

If you'd like to start practicing these photo editing techniques, can I suggest you get your hands on a copy of Photoshop LE (which often is provided as an add-on with various software packages) or download any number of other free editor versions of software such as PrintShop or even some of the early versions of CorelDraw. Certainly Adobe Photoshop is the preference if you can get a bonafide edition.

What have you been using up until now?

------

BTW, I hope you don't mind that I have added a revised version of the image you originally conceived and to which I added shadows etc and placed that on my website. I have credited you on the site as well as the image.

There will be new MERSFX images coming up soon, plus a special edition that I'm working on for SS

Cheers
Astro0
http://www.zip.com.au/~gjn/MERSFX/indexSFX.html

Posted by: SigurRosFan Mar 1 2006, 01:36 PM

Only GIMP and PhotoImpact, Corel Draw is not installed.

Again and again I ask myself: How you fade away these rover tracks. So Perfectly!

Posted by: Phil Stooke Mar 1 2006, 02:02 PM

Re: the sinkhole discussion up above... especially Bob's comment...

Eagle's raised rim is the evidence I'd use for its impact origin. The relatively weak rocks and maybe 50 cm of debris overlying them (absorbing shock) could easily account for the lack of shock effects in the visible rocks, not to mention a long period of weathering and also the possibility it could be a secondary (less shock to begin with).

Phil

Posted by: djellison Mar 1 2006, 04:15 PM

Quoting from Grotzinger et.al. in EPSL

"To obtain true stratigraphic thicknesses, one must be able to correct for deformation of strata associated with folding, faulting, and brecciation due to impact. At Eagle, Anatolia, and Fram the bedrock is fractured and consists of rotated blocks. In general, systematic deformation patterns are absent, which precludes ordering of the stratigraphy at those locations. Exceptions to this are the El Capitan and Big Bend areas of Eagle crater, where strata can be traced laterally for several meters as mostly intact units"

Doug

Posted by: imipak Mar 1 2006, 09:28 PM

Hello everyone, my name's Imipak, and... I'm a Mars addict.

Astro0 -- remember, your 'sad' hobby is not just keeping you off the streets but the exercise of your creativity is giving a lot of pleasure to me, and everyone else I'm sure. And - seeing as I seem to be in 'yer-me-bestest-mate' mode *) - I'd like to say a huige thank-you to everyone who's posting imagery here. I love it all! In fact I enjoy images that get worked-on and improved most of all. Single pancam shots of a patch of sand looks fantastic to me, afte 12 years waiting for Pathfinder! A simple two or three shot pan is even better, but seeing others then get more out of those already stunning pics is fascinating. And inspiring... (it's inspiring me into thinking it's time I finally retired this P2 to file server duties and bought a new computer and a couple of nice flat screens... hmmm and MMB is written in Java, and GPL'd, and reading other people's code is always interesting. Yes, my (other) idea of fun is reading other people's source code )

Posted by: Astro0 Mar 2 2006, 04:23 AM

To everyone in the IPTG on the UMSF,
I invite you all to send your SFX contributions to this new thread
http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=2341

Astro0