IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Juno perijove 9, October 24, 2017, near solar conjunction
scalbers
post Dec 4 2017, 09:15 PM
Post #46


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1354
Joined: 5-March 05
From: Boulder, CO
Member No.: 184



Amazing planet and excellent work from Sean and Gerald. I'm gradually getting better at figuring which belts/zones we are seeing when we're at somewhat lower latitudes. Post #31 helps with this.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sean
post Dec 12 2017, 03:19 PM
Post #47


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 821
Joined: 10-November 15
Member No.: 7837



Someone on Twitter sent me this...



I think it really ties the room together!





--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
djellison
post Dec 12 2017, 04:25 PM
Post #48


Administrator
****

Group: Chairman
Posts: 14187
Joined: 8-February 04
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Sean @ Dec 12 2017, 07:19 AM) *
Someone on Twitter sent me this...


Damn - that's a nice dining room table.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
algorithm
post Dec 12 2017, 04:54 PM
Post #49


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 327
Joined: 11-December 12
From: The home of Corby Crater (Corby-England)
Member No.: 6783



Walnut? or birds eye Maple perhaps, nah, too dark, which brings me onto that!!! couch....

The slightly fuzzy, wrapped canvas isn't too bad though. biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Sean
post Dec 12 2017, 04:58 PM
Post #50


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 821
Joined: 10-November 15
Member No.: 7837



Haha... thanks Doug, I love coffee coming out of my nose!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jay
post Dec 14 2017, 09:02 PM
Post #51


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 14-December 17
Member No.: 8308



Hey everybody, first time posting to the site after learning of it's existence the other day. I've been getting back into space-oriented side projects lately and wanted to add Juno image processing to the list. I haven't dug too far into the "proper" methods of processing these images yet but did a quick test last night regardless. I was really surprised to find that compiling the color separations into one image seem to leave the result pretty far feeling from true color.

I'll be looking at more methods to bring that to a better accuracy but for now I wanted to share what I came up with, on the left is what I got just from compiling the red green and blue channels and on the right was my first run at altering it to try and bring out some of the detail. I didn't do any drastic colors, I was mostly trying to sort out how to bring out the clarity of the features from the North Pole image I used. I would love any feedback you could provide and plan to post more as I continue to refine my process, and will probably also experiment with some other styles just for fun.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kgreene
post Dec 15 2017, 01:20 AM
Post #52


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 13-November 17
Member No.: 8284



Hi Jay (and everyone). I was in your position about a month ago. I wrote an automated processing pipeline to process the raw images for a class, though it still needs some improvement. Most of the info I needed I found either in technical papers or on this forum.

Did you decompand the image data? I found that helped a huge amount, though the color channels still need calibrating afterwards. If so, you probably just need to weight the color channels. I found several in these forums, the one I ended up using was one Gerald suggested in one of his papers: http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.p...st&id=42174

QUOTE
Linear radiometric weights applied to decompanded raw data are 0.82 for red, 1.0 for green, and 2.17 for blue. This may induce a slightly greenish cast.


Actually, I was thinking maybe we need a thread specifically for how to process junocam images? I spent a long time reading through all the other threads and little bits of info were scattered all over the place. It would be nice to have them all grouped together and we can all help improve it.

Kevin
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gerald
post Dec 15 2017, 12:06 PM
Post #53


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2264
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.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Dec 15 2017, 05:51 PM
Post #54


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1903
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (Gerald @ Dec 15 2017, 04:06 AM) *
The JunoCam extension for ISIS3 is work in progress since quite a while...

There is a beta version of ISIS3 that supports Junocam. I was told not to distribute it "outside the team" but since everyone here is on the Junocam team I'm not sure what that means. smile.gif If you're interested PM me with details about which platform you want it for -- it's available for the 64-bit version of Mac OSX 10.11 and various 64-bit flavors of Linux. It's worth noting that ISIS3 has a very very steep learning curve so this is not something you should ask for casually -- you might start by downloading the production version of ISIS3 to see if you can figure out how to use it on a simpler case.

As for a unified thread about Junocam processing -- I'm not sure there's a unified thread about anything on UMSF, but it's a good idea in theory. The thread over in http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=8353 is an example, perhaps overly specific to the standard SPICE formalism. Some amateurs have documented their workflows in fair detail, some have not (which is fine) -- I am always curious to see how people are doing what they are doing.


--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kgreene
post Dec 15 2017, 05:56 PM
Post #55


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.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jay
post Dec 15 2017, 07:50 PM
Post #56


Newbie
*

Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 14-December 17
Member No.: 8308



Thank you all for sharing the information, I'll be sure to read through the provided links when I get home tonight. I did not decompand the image, to be honest I'm a bit like Alice tumbling into the rabbit hole, not having realized how deep the work with these images goes, but I love it. I focus mainly on 3D work but want to be able to process and include real imagery for future projects (and its also a blast) so I'm starting at the ground floor with processing actual spacecraft imagery.

That said I haven't had as much fun with Photoshop in a long time as I have with my first runs with Perijove 9. I can see though Gerald why many people base their work off yours as a starting point. Really loving the community and work this place provides, so thank you all for that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gerald
post Dec 15 2017, 09:57 PM
Post #57


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 2264
Joined: 7-December 12
Member No.: 6780



QUOTE (mcaplinger @ Dec 15 2017, 06:51 PM) *
There is a beta version of ISIS3 that supports Junocam. I was told not to distribute it "outside the team" but since everyone here is on the Junocam team I'm not sure what that means. smile.gif
...

I've access to the beta, in principle, but no system it is running on. A member of USGS considered providing a VM. This would simplify installation "infinitely".
But I've loads of other tasks. So, I may not be the first one to test the ISIS3 extension for JunoCam.

@Jay, you can really learn lots of interesting things from JunoCam image processing, once you are ready to dive into this adventure.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mcaplinger
post Dec 16 2017, 04:11 PM
Post #58


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1903
Joined: 13-September 05
Member No.: 497



QUOTE (kgreene @ Dec 15 2017, 09:56 AM) *
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.)

Attached Image

Attached Image




--------------------
Disclaimer: This post is based on public information only. Any opinions are my own.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bjorn Jonsson
post Dec 20 2017, 10:58 PM
Post #59


IMG to PNG GOD
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2053
Joined: 19-February 04
From: Near fire and ice
Member No.: 38



A bit late (since the PJ10 images are now available) but here are my versions of PJ9_081 ("northern coverage"). Approximately true color/contrast versions and then enhanced versions:

Attached Image
Attached Image

Attached Image


Attached Image

Attached Image
Attached Image


And some metadata:

IMAGE_TIME = 2017-10-24T17:32:07.116
MISSION_PHASE_NAME = PERIJOVE 9
PRODUCT_ID = JNCE_2017297_09C00081_V01
SPACECRAFT_ALTITUDE = 10107.7 km
SPACECRAFT_NAME = JUNO
SUB_SPACECRAFT_LATITUDE = 41.8417
SUB_SPACECRAFT_LONGITUDE = 220.0255
TITLE = Northern coverage
Resolution at nadir: ~6.8 km/pixel
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bjorn Jonsson
post Dec 20 2017, 11:26 PM
Post #60


IMG to PNG GOD
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 2053
Joined: 19-February 04
From: Near fire and ice
Member No.: 38



There is an area in one of the enhanced PJ9_081 images in my previous post that I find especially interesting:

Attached Image


Here I get the impression that we are seeing thin haze or tenuous and largely transparent high altitude clouds (at several locations indicated by arrows) overlying a deeper and darker layer of clouds. Of course this could also be something different.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 11th December 2019 - 06:06 PM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and 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 a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.