Registax and MER images, Just seeing if it works... Options

[Stu]

After James mentioned "stacking" in one of his posts in the 'Distant Vistas' thread, I thought I'd have a go at using the astronomical image stacking freeware program "Registax" with MER images, just to see if it would work - hoping, of course, to bring out details on the Endeavour hills - and was quite pleasantly surprised with how it turned out. Others can do much better, I'm sure, but for a first go, hmm, quite happy.

Took half a dozen Pancam images of our old friend from Sol 2024 (Oct 2009), like this...



... and after stacking them together, and doing a bit more tweaking with contrast and brightness and cropping, got this...



As usual with my stuff, not claiming any scientific value, or new insights into the associated geology, just trying to make an attractive picture.

Some more here: http://roadtoendeavour.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/stack-em-up including one I'm really pleased with... http://roadtoendeavour.files.wordpress.com...8/met-new2b.jpg

[Ian R]

Well, you've succeeded with flying colours, Stu!

[elakdawalla]

Stu, are you starting with the raw JPEG or with the archived data? You'll get better results with the latter, and it's available for that sol.

[Stu]

Starting with raw, for now. Will have to build up to the better stuff, when I have more time; I'm very much an enthusiastic amateur with this stuff

[elakdawalla]

Using the raw images when the calibrated stuff is available is like being allowed to use anything, any paint, any canvas, any material in an artist's studio for free and saying, "no thanks, I'll stick with my Crayola™ 8-color watercolor set, thank you." The raw images are out there to pique your curiosity; you've been gaining experience with them for six years, and you clearly spend many hours a week manipulating them. You -- (and I'm not just talking to you, Stu, I'm talking to everyone who's reading) -- should conquer your fear that "it's too hard" because it's NOT too hard, there are so many tools available to help you get to the real data. Only showing images generated from the cruddy JPEGgy overstretched raw versions does a disservice to our ladies' amazing vision. Especially if you are going to go through processing steps like stacking -- for goodness' sake, don't handicap yourself with the JPEGs, use the real data!!

(This rant will no doubt turn into a blog entry this week.)

[James Sorenson]

I certainly agree with you Emily. Lately I have been playing with the PDS data myself. The JPG's are a nice preview, but nothing compares with the original data from the PDS. Not just with MER, but with any mission available.

[Astro0]

I agree with the above, but it's worth noting that what Stu is doing is showing we lesser mortals another technique to get the most out of the stretched JPGs until the uncompressed stuff arrives on the PDS. Not everyone wants to wait 6 months until that data is released. A quick preview now using this stacked process is valuable and will help some of us who have less time and download limits to do something of value with the available data until the best stuff hits the PDS. I think that this is what UMSF is all about. We sit at our computers agog at the stuff produced some some of the better image mages we have here and wish we could do that stuff ourselves. Each and every little step and technique demonstrated on this Forum helps the rest of us get a little closer to the stars.

[Stu]

Well, I was quite pleased with those efforts, sat here at the back of the class with my crayons...

I do know what you mean Emily, but I haven't used the pds stuff because, to be honest, I'm not a genius on a computer and I'm a lousy 'data trawler', so I stick with what I know I can do reasonably well, and am happy to let others with more technical savvy produce the masterpieces. That's not being lazy or scared, it's just knowing my current limitations. I really do do it just for fun. I don't feel any obligation to join in some image processing arms race. My flag is planted firmly atop 'Pretty Picture Hill' and I quite like the view from up here

I hope no new members, or existing members, thinking about finally starting image processing, have been put off by this discussion. Yes, the raws are - well, raw, but you can still make great pictures out of them, and there's great a sense of achievement making a colour pic from a trio of raws. The images I've made are obviously not as good as they would have been if I'd used pds images, and I will probably try that eventually, but they've been very well received by the audiences of the Outreach talks I've given in universe knows how many school classrooms, community centres and village halls over the years. So, if you're sat there thinking about giving it a go yourself, then give it a go! And remember to have fun while you do it!

[elakdawalla]

But you don't have to be an "experienced data trawler," Stu, that's what I'm trying to say (and it may seem I'm picking on you, but I am talking to everyone who's gotten into space image processing because of the raw data but is scared to plunge into the real data). I just asked myself the question: "how can I get to PDS versions of the images in the fewest number of clicks, without any special software?" Please just humor me and follow my clicks:

Go to the PDS Imaging Node.
Click on the link at left to Planetary Image Atlas.
Under the "Select Mission" window at top left, click "Mars Exploration Rover."
Under the "Image Type" thingy in the center, click "Regular."
Under "Planet Day Number," type in the sol number you're interested in (in this case 2024), same in both boxes.
If you want, you can select just Pancam or whatever, but you don't have to.
On the left, under "Product Search," click "Get Results."
There, now you can find all the images from sol 2024. Click on any one of them, and you'll get the option to download it in whatever format you like -- JPEG, PNG, TIFF, or GIF.

That's it. That's all you have to do. Four clicks and type in the sol number, and you're at the pictures you want. No special software. No programming. Nothing scary. The computer won't bite you. You do so much outreach and so much work with these photos -- I can't understand why you'd want to work with the crappy JPEG photos -- and show all the people you talk to those photos -- when just four clicks will get you to the REAL data, in nice, safe formats you're familiar with, like PNG. We work with the raw JPEGs because that's what we have to do to follow the mission in real time, but once the real data is available, with all the artifacts calibrated out, it's a terrible shame to keep working with the JPEGs.

And guess what? A similar series of clicks gets you straight to science quality photos from nearly every mission that carried a camera into space. Cassini, too, and Voyager, Galileo, Viking, etc. etc. Three clicks just got me to every single photo of Deimos from Viking Orbiter. It is all there at the Imaging Node.

JUST FOUR CLICKS. EVERYBODY DO IT. I know it's intimidating, so do it when nobody else is watching. But there's no reason you can't look at the real data. Don't sell yourselves short, you're all scientists, so look at the science data!

[Stu]

I'll be totally honest, I had no idea it was actually that easy. I have tried accessing pds data before but got lost on the page I tried. Looks like it's time to give it another go. Thanks for the step-by-step guide, Emily, that will be extremely useful for a lot of people here.

[elakdawalla]

For some missions it's not *quite* that easy -- for instance, they archive HRSC and MOC data, but not in easy formats like PNG or TIFF, for those you have to be able to handle IMG. But there is a shocking amount of data available in just those few clicks.

[Stu]

...and, my first PDS-derived image...



Looks like I'm going to need a new external hard drive...

Thanks Emily, it's going to be fun working with that data.

[elakdawalla]

Dragged you kicking and screaming, but I got you there

[Astro0]

OMG - Stu will be impossible to stop now.
I can hear him drooling all over the PDS from here ( eww! )

[Stu]

Dragged you kicking and screaming, but I got you there

No, seriously, I was under the genuine impression that it was a LOT harder to get at and use that data than that. "PDS data" has always been spoken about in hushed, almost hallowed tones, and I'd been to that very page before and got absolutely nowhere, so I had comvinced myself there must be a lot more to it. It's never been explained so simply and practically before, so thanks again.