Juno Perijove 43, July 5, 2022 Options

[Brian Swift]

Video of PJ43 Io encounter expectation from Volcanopele, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsEKPbXTJlU

[volcanopele]

It will definitely be interesting to see, as the encounters happen, at what resolution will a surface change become obvious. Unfortunately, the one that I KNOW has to be there (Chalybes) is on the night side for these encounters (it does pass through the SRU FOV during the PJ57 encounter). Maybe there will be something around East Girru and Volund?

[Brian Swift]

Io images PJ43_02...PJ43_09 acquired on 2022-07-05 4:22 to 5:33 UTC from distances of 86132 to 107584 km.
(Preliminary processing. Lot of radiation hits.)

[Kevin Gill]

Some initial images of Jupiter for PJ43



Jupiter - PJ43-25


Jupiter - PJ43-31


Jupiter - PJ43-29


Jupiter - PJ43-35 - Detail


Jupiter - PJ43-41 - Detail

[Bjorn Jonsson]

This is a montage of Io images 2 to 9:



The images are enlarged by a factor of 5 relative to the original data. The color balance is preliminary. Hopefully this is not very far from Io's real color but Io's color is a notoriously complicated subject. The viewing geometry for the first and last image is shown using computer generated images based on a Voyager/Galileo map of Io.

[volcanopele]

I guess I might as well throw in my versions of the Io data:



Reprojected to 5x the original resolution. Map projection is point perspective.

No plumes that I could see, though I'm not terribly surprised. a surface change at Chors Patera (and a bit to its north). Vivasvant is darker compared to its appearance in the basemap, but that change started in the Galileo era. The change at Dazhbog also dates from 2001.

Color looks good to me. Similar to my expectations based on the channel manipulation I did with Galileo data based on some work Bjorn did.

[Bjorn Jonsson]

This is image PJ43_36 in approximately true color/contrast and enhanced versions:



The processing of the enhanced image is partially experimental. A large part of the original image data is rather dark and noisy. This is especially true for the blue channel; the green channel is better but nevertheless somewhat noisy. There is relatively little noise in the red channel. Compression artifacts are also apparent and (as discussed elsewhere) mainly show up as uniform areas, especially in dark areas in the original image data. Like the noise they are mainly present in the blue channel and to a lesser extent in the green channel. Because of this I decided to create a new blue channel image by combining low frequency information from the original blue image with high frequency information from the green channel. I also created a new green image by taking low frequency information from the original green image and high frequency information from the red channel. This was rather successful and largely eliminated the aforementioned uniform areas and also reduced the noise.

What I did can probably be improved, for example I suspect the 'weight' of the high frequency data is too high, at least in the new blue image (in other words, very small scale features have too high contrast relative to surrounding areas). Also the weight should possibly be a function of image brightness. One possible way to improve the new blue and green images may be to use some of the few lossless JunoCam images as 'ground truth'.

This is a comparison (animated gif) of contrast stretched versions of a part of the original and 'new' blue channel image. This is enlarged by a factor of 2:



And the green one:



A big visual improvement but whether some of the details visible in the new image versions really would be visible in real images with lossless compression is the big question.

[Brian Swift]

PJ43 Northern Circumpolar Cyclones 3-frame Animation spanning 8 minutes
Exaggerated Color/Contrast

Altitude range: 31743.2 to 20314.8 km
Image Data acquired: 2022-07-05T08:49 to 2022-07-05T08:57:52
Uses: JNCE_2022186_43C00029_V01,JNCE_2022186_43C00031_V01,JNCE_2022186_43C00033_V01
Render Size: 1224, 1020

[Bill Harris]

That animation was so subtle.

[Brian Swift]

That animation was so subtle.

True. But can't expect too much change over 8 minutes. Though since the rotating vortices are 3-4000km across,
if we guestimate the rotation to be at least 2º over the 8 minutes, that puts the movement at >375km/h.

Would be awesome if there was a space based observatory continuously looking at the clouds. It could be called the Jupiter Weather Station Telescope.

[Tom Tamlyn]

ISTR that this was one of the objectives of Galileo before the X-band antenna failed. In something I read about the mission there was a quote from a team member along the lines of "we're going to be able to take movies of Jupiter's clouds."

Alas ...

[Explorer1]

Unfortunately a synchronous orbit (which would be the best way to do it, like Earth observing satellites do) is right between the inner irregular moons. It would be rather difficult to both reach (delta-v) and remain functional for a long period in the radiation environment.

[Brian Swift]

Prominent structure appearing in PJ43_34 and PJ43_3 rended as a cross-eye stereoscopic pair.
Image pair shows some disparity based depth effect.
Color/contrast are exaggerated.

PJ43_34 image data acquired 2022-07-05T09:00 from altitude 16479.9 km
PJ43_36 image data acquired 2022-07-05T09:05 from altitude 11374.4 km

Both images are rendered from position of PJ43_35 using point perspective with 40º FOV at 4k-by-4k resolution.

Full resolution PNG version available at https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu/junocam/processing?id=13505

[Brian Swift]

Another subtle animation...
PJ43 Southern Cloud Movements Animation Spanning 48 minutes
Rendering: Orthographic centered on South Pole
Greyscale (mean of exaggerated red and green channels)
Image data acquired: 2022-07-05T11:29 to 2022-07-05T12:17
Altitude range: 204727.5 to 274852.7 km

3 Frame animation of PJ43_72, PJ43_75, PJ43_80
Resolution: 1495x1495

[Bill Harris]

Prominent structure appearing in PJ43_34 and PJ43_3 rended as a cross-eye stereoscopic pair.
Image pair shows some disparity based depth effect.
Color/contrast are exaggerated.

PJ43_34 image data acquired 2022-07-05T09:00 from altitude 16479.9 km
PJ43_36 image data acquired 2022-07-05T09:05 from altitude 11374.4 km

Both images are rendered from position of PJ43_35 using point perspective with 40º FOV at 4k-by-4k resolution.

Full resolution PNG version available at https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu/junocam/processing?id=13505

What sort of "relief" are we looking at here? Is there any vertical exaggeration applied to the stereo image (doubt it)? What is the scale of the base image, anyway? I just realized that I've been looking at these Juno images without having an idea of how big this is, other than BIG.

--Bill