Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Unmanned Spaceflight.com _ Lunar Exploration _ Kaguya vs Clementine mapping

Posted by: JohnVV Dec 15 2009, 06:58 AM

before i get to far into remapping the Clementine map to match the Kaguya topo map
i would like some advice from the experts here . The ones with MORE exp than i do .
i am assuming that the new Kaguya map is more accurate than the older clem. map
http://pds-imaging.jpl.nasa.gov/Admin/resources/cd_clementine.html
cl_4001 to cl_4078 ( 303 px /M )
verse
LALT_GGT_MAP.img ( 5760x2880) 16 px/M

so before the very big undertaking of moving creates around ( by about 70to 150 px in a 65538x32768 map)

or would it be more wise to remap Kaguya to match the Clem. map ??????
an example
i did a small 8192x4096 clem. map
http://www.zshare.net/download/6949186428af5e69/
http://www.shatters.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=15600

Posted by: Phil Stooke Dec 15 2009, 02:42 PM

Assuming the Kaguya altimetry team did their work correctly, as I would expect, the new Kaguya geodetic control is going to be a big improvement on the Clementine control. Only LRO-LOLA will be better, when we have it.

The previous best control, used to make the recent Lunar Orbiter mosaic and the most up to date version of the Clementine basemap, is the Unified Lunar Control Network. It's a combination of several datasets, none of which is up to modern standards, but the best that could be done before Kaguya and LRO.

Phil

Posted by: JohnVV Dec 16 2009, 04:41 AM

hi phil that was what i was assuming .that there lat/long measurements would be more precise .
as some have seen ( on different forums) there is a bit of an offset

at least it is only minor warping that needs to be done , but on a LOT of images

Posted by: JohnVV Jan 25 2010, 05:49 AM

-- still a work in progress --

it has been a while and here are the first 3 layers of the clementine UVIS cub
it is at 333.142277653 meters/pixel ( 32768x16384 )

there is a bit of an error in the map that i have not been able to ( not have added ) get "isis3 - Automos" to NOT ADD Gerrrrrrrr..
but ...

this is just the raw output of warp to get it in alignment with the topo data

an at the present i am estimating it to be about 95% to 98% accurate

-- the error is at -180 deg ( the first 4 samples ) and at 180 ( the last sample - 32768 ) need to be removed then the map resized
0.415000 Nm filter
Band1.NE.cub.bz2 - 105.3 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/7164855174a70a55/
Band1.NW.cub.bz2 - 102.4 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71649033be54d68c/
Band1.SE.cub.bz2 - 107.3 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71649502b1c87c9e/
Band1.SW.cub.bz2 - 107.4 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71649945e30c2edb/

---------------- EDIT -----
in band 2 here there is a unintended error
Somehow i cropped off the top 25 pixels
this effects only this band
0.750000 nm
band2.run2.NE.cub.bz2 - 124.7 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/716516416700cc41/
band2.run2.NW.cub.bz2 - 122.5 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/7165213964ae372d/
band2.run2.SE.cub.bz2 - 125.6 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71652552f802db26/
band2.run2.SW.cub.bz2 - 126.7 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/7165298947503c98/

----------------------------
0.900000 nm

band3.run2.NE.cub.bz2 - 123.4 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71653842051fddb0/
band3.run2.NW.cub.bz2 - 119.6 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71654282f9275e24/
band3.run2.SE.cub.bz2 - 123.3 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/716552308caa542f/
band3.run2.SW.cub.bz2 - 124.0 MB
http://www.zshare.net/download/71655723a94c409e/

PS if some one would like to mirror them , someplace other than zshare feel free to do so.