Your supposition might be valid. This impact might comes from the other bigger craters which might be few kilometers away from VC.

I tought it might comes from the VC due to the central angle of splash is pointing at more or less to VC. The East of BC has small rays but on the West side has much bigger ones.

Map of VC and BC

The final truth that BC is a secondary impact from VC, might be after analyzing the surface composition at the bottom of BC and VC which are identical, might not it? What instrument will disclose that incognite: MiniTES, X-Ray spectometer or Mossbauer spectometer? I tought a more powerful microscopic than PI might reveal it, does not it?

Rodolfo

Yes, and I think I know why because it happened to me only when replying to climber . Hello, climber!

Sometimes, he answers including a kind of quote that actually contains a quote-start mark but doesn't end with the "slash"-quote. It seems that such a string "hurts" to the forum sw when trying to reply.

[quote]This is an example.

Try to reply to this post; you will probably get an error.

Aha! Sherlock Holmes strikes again! Well done, Tesh. I almost can't believe it's so simple. I never noticed that it only happened with Climber's posts. I have noticed for quite a while that Climber has trouble making the quote window work. Probably because, when deleting portions of the quoted message, he also deletes the [/quote]. (Damn, I wonder if that will bugger up my message?)

ATTENTION, CLIMBER! If you want replies to your posts, don't delete that thingie above.

Bravo, Shaka. It's nice to see you posting images to help others see what you see.

You could very well be correct, but I'll reserve my opinion a while longer, until we get closer. I see what you are saying, but using these extended baseline stereo-pairs from raw imagery is right on the cutting edge, as far as I can tell. Using the anaglyph I made from the stretched stereo-pair that dilo gave us, that 3rd peak from the left does appear to be on the near side. But when I look at the anaglyph made from fredk's stereo-pair, I see it on the far side. It would be interesting to hear what dilo and fredk think.

When I made my post last night, I was also putting a lot of faith in my interpretation of the 2D appearance of BC in the MOC image. The asymmetric distribution of the bright material around the crater suggests to me that the impactor that created BC came in from the NW, thus throwing out those longer bright raylets toward the SSE, SE and SW. It seemed logical that such an impact might also create a SE rim that was higher than the NW rim. I still think that is a reasonable hypothesis, but that too, is on my cutting edge. (attached is my markup of your image, showing my presumed impact direction.) ...looking forward to the ground truth...
Click to view attachment

Tom, yours is an interesting theory (trying to determine the vector of the impactor), and I wouldn't discount it at this point. However, I will say that asymmetric ejecta blankets are more often caused by variations in the target rock beds than they are by the impactor's vector.

It really depends on how fast the impactor is going. Some secondaries are higher-velocity than others (and involve greater impactor masses), and above a certain velocity and/or kinetic energy (i.e., mass of the impactor times velocity), even a very depressed vector will result in a perfectly round crater and a fairly evenly distributed ejecta blanket.

Pre-existing target topography and composition usually controls ejecta asymmetry more than vector, I believe... but, on Mars, we have seen a greater population of grazing impacts than we do on, say, the Moon. What the mechanism for that is, I couldn't tell you.

-the other Doug

Can't believe it! Realy sorry for this!
Now I have a doubt! Where do I have to write. Let's try this way

It's perfect like that climber, it works.

[quote]This is an example.
Try to reply to this post; you will probably get an error.

Oh thanks Tesheiner!
You're damn right.

Thanks ustrax...even if I was thinkibng you were jocking : I was 3 times an error to answer to you
Thanks to all, but we'd better stop saying it works NOW. I don't want to open a new topic for this

[i]"I realy don't see what you see, and the reversed MOC pictures of Beagle you're using is quite confusing to me."
Isn't that strange. I thought it an obvious thing to do - invert the MOC view - so that the left (east) side of the crater and the right (west) side lined up vertically in both images. Does anyone else feel confused by this? It's the only way I feel comfortable doing the image comparison.[/i]
[/quote]
Well, I understand what you mean now. It's just a different way of interpretation. When I hike up in the mountains, I hold the map in the way I can read it so left on the map is right on the field while some people hold the map the way they go (but have to turn it around to read what is written) : left on the map is left on the field. Sorry I didn't thougth of this before. I'm sure some others are confused too.

Edit : damnit the "[/quote]" is showing again! What do I have to do so it'll not show?

start with "[quote]"

It's quite easy




same with test

Well, rocker, I won't tell you what I think, I'll just present to you Beagle Crater:
Click to view attachment
This is a the latest long-baseline analglyph, sols 853 and 855, with 200% zoom but no vertical stretch. Even though we're approaching Beagle, there's enough side-to-side motion to give a good 3d effect. It's now absolutely clear where each of the outcrops lie.

I prefer the cross-eyed version (100%, no stretch):
Click to view attachment
To save extreme cross-eyeing, I strongly recommend the free StereoPhoto Maker. It allows you to pan across the image without having the two sides too far apart. Even at 200% zoom (which I suggest you try with this image!)

Aaarrrrrgghhhh!Click to view attachment

Help. Freddo, I can't see either of your versions.

But I made a close study of Tom's anaglyph yesterday and thought I could trace in the near rim line:
Click to view attachment

Does this agree at all with what you see? Can you try something similar with your anaglyph?

Shak, what problem are you having with the analglyph? Do you normally have trouble viewing analglyphs?

As for the cross-eyed, the only help is to chop them up into slices easier to fuse, or use StereoPhoto Maker!

I'm seeing double images and can't get any sense of depth.

Sometimes. I have no trouble with CosRok's stretched anaglyph, though.

Ouch! Does Mars demand that of me? I thought the stretched baseline was enough.
I just downloaded and started StereoPhoto Maker, and opened your left/right image, but haven't figured out yet how to use it to make things easier. I can actually get some cross-eye pairs to works, but with yours my eye muscles fight this tremendous battle to 'open up' the 3D middle image, but it slams shut, and ...well...you can see the results. It hurts!

Fred, your stereogram is very impressive, thanks!

I'm afraid I can't get either one to work, either. I normally don't have a problem with anaglyphs.

Michaelc

I really don't know what the problem with the red/green one is. I have no trouble with it. Keep trying?

Once you've got the cross-eyed loaded in SPM, select 100% view size, or even better 200%. Then, to make it easy to fuse, just grab an edge of the SPM window and drag it to make the window narrower. The L/R images get closer together as you do this, so you won't see the entire crater at once, but you can left-mouse-button drag the image itself to pan across it.

Stone the flamin' crows, this is spooky. Michael, are you near or far?
Maybe we need a poll on this? Bobby? Shirley? Warmonger? Now where has that guy gone to when we need him?

No joy. I even downloaded it to Photoshop and tried a range of sizes. Same story with SPM.
I definitely think there's a research project here in cognitive psychology. Anybody out there want another degree?

Oh well! What about my traced near rim line? Do you see anything like that in your images?
What do you see?

I'm a fence sitter.

I loaded Fred's image into SPM, and I fiddled with it until I produced an image that merges, at least for me. Let's see what happens when I upload it here.

Click to view attachment

Michaelc

Oww! My achin' eyes. I gotta go lay down for awhile. Your image is very disturbing, MC. I see things popping in and out the longer I stare. I just can't sort out the unstretched 3D images at this distance. For some reason CosRok's stretched anaglyph (post #93) works well for me. Go figure.
I don't think I want to suffer anymore to see something we'll be sitting on in a couple of weeks. I'll wait.

Michael, your image has red/green channels switched!

Man! Usually I consider myself unlucky being unable to see *any* 3D images. But now I should say I feel, er ... lucky.

Can we now compare the relative elevation above the plain of the higher "peak" of Beagle as compared to VC's? Beacon?

One thing to keep in mind when viewing these long baseline stereo pairs is that the foreground is very different between the left and right images. Thus, there is no stereo effect there. All of the 3D effect is in the distance. I think that may be one reason why so many people are having trouble with these. I must admit that I sometimes have difficulties with them as well. Sometimes one image will work for me, but later I have trouble with it.

Hmm. I hope I didn't inadvertently cause anybody's eyes to fall out. My image was taken directly from the standard red-cyan setting in SPM. Unless the images were somehow reversed. My glasses have red on the left and cyan on the right, and although the crater itself doesn't seem to show much depth, I'm clearly seeing that the whole image is in 3-D

Maybe I should leave this to the more experienced.

Michaelc

Is this the far rim or near rim of Corner (Beagle) Crater???

http://qt.exploratorium.edu/mars/opportuni...00P2434L2M1.JPG

New images from today are in at exploratorium web site

I can see part of the far rim through a gap in the near rim

>I can see part of the far rim through a gap in the near rim

Ah, so it's deja vu all over again...

--Bill

I don't know if this will help or not, but I made a small rotational adjustment to fredk's left-eye image. The images were slightly rotated with respect to one another. It seems to work a little better for me. I aligned the left and right images on that dark rock just left of center, so even if you can't make the anaglyh work for you, you can get a sense for the distance of features by the amount of offset between the feature in the red and cyan images. The greater the offset between them, the farther away that feature is.

The attached montage has anaglyphs at 100%, 200%, and one with 3X vertical exaggeration. It seems to me that the 3rd peak from the left is indeed on the near side, the 2nd from the left is somewhat behind it, and the other peaks are on the far side. Click to view attachment

O.K., Tom. We're making some progress here. The stretched anaglyph, like your earlier one, is easier for me to see the lay of the land. I see basically the same as before: The third peak from left is near rim, as is the right-hand portion of the peak at the right end. (The left-hand portion is far rim.) The continuous, low band connecting the peaks is near rim, so the far peaks all jut above it. This is what I would expect from the MOC image, and it confirms my rim line in post #114, as well as my attempt to correlate the two views in post #96.
Additionally, "Black Beacon", to left of center, is in front of near rim, while the smaller black dot to right of center is somewhere behind near rim.
Would you agree? I do hope we can all agree about Beagle. Victoria may just have to go in the "Hopeless Cases" bin. When we finally get to that Beacon, I hope JPL does a complete MI map of the whole slab, so that the Sponge Patrol can finally see, in fine resolution, the Light of Truth.

Yup! That did it for me!. Definitely got a more 3D effect.

Thanks Tom.

Nice job with the analglyph, Tom! When I look at your 3x vert stretch version, Beagle actually looks like a crater, with near rim sloping up from the plains, then curving around the sides, and then bits of the far rim peeking above the near.

Shaka, glad you can see the light! I agree with your diagnosis.

Thanks, people. I've been playing with anaglyphs for a while, and it never ceases to amaze me how a slight change can make a big difference for some people, sometimes. It's bad enough working with images taken from the same location, but when pushing it to acheive long baselines, a lot of geometry messes things up. For some reason, the vertically exaggerated image does seem to work the best, here, which is why I suspect dilo posted the earlier one that way.

Is this stuff fun, or what?

YeeeeeHawwww!!
Click to view attachment

At last! A picture of Shaka for the virtual BBQ!

But who's the guy in the clown suit?

Bob Shaw

What about a 'pool for arrival' and parking on the edge of CC? (er um uh, 'Beagle Crater' i meant to say...)

its starting to look like it'll be SOL 876

>What about a 'pool for arrival'...

Good idea. I'll say "eventually".



--Bill

Beagle for the crater is official...

'Opportunity is healthy. The rover has started receiving a new flight software load. It also advanced 138.1 meters (453 feet) toward "Victoria Crater" in three sols of driving and observed outcrop targets. As of sol 855 (June 20) Opportunity was 780 meters (just under half a mile) from Victoria Crater and about 300 meters (984 feet) from "Beagle Crater."'

UMSF had the exclusive...

The view toward Beagle is more and more precise.
http://origin.mars5.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/a...CNP2435R2M1.JPG
The crater place seems to be a bit complex.

Dune related posts moved here
http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=2919
Wouldn't want to lose that discussion after Oppy moves beyond Beagle.

Pics are back up

http://qt.exploratorium.edu/mars/opportuni...O9P2436L2M1.JPG
http://qt.exploratorium.edu/mars/opportuni...O9P2436L2M1.JPG

The ejecta blanket behind CC has been a uniform dark background for so long - I'm relieved that we're getting some detail on it now. It only serves to emphasise how close we are now to this bright and bonny crater.

An extract from Press Release Images: Opportunity http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/pre.../20060628a.html

Even at this distance, blocks of ejecta can be seen around the prominent, raised rim of Beagle crater, suggesting that it may be among the youngest craters visited by Opportunity.

Many of us have been speculating that the Beagle Crater was originated after Victoria crater. On the other hand, after BC, there are others 2 mini-craters on the way to VC. These are measured between 10 to 14 meters of diameters. The curious thing is that Beagle crater is the biggest among the many mini-craters around Victoria Crater. According to the PIA08447 picture, I identified about 22 mini-craters with about 8 or more meters of diameter (The East of VC has a partial view). There are many more smaller mini-crater with less than 8 meters around VC arpon. These have no bright arpon or outcrop. It might be due that they aren't deep or they are close to VC rim sand deposition.

One important thing that I want to mention that about north of Beagle Crater (800 meters) has a rather comparable BC's size. That mini-crater has, indeed, not much bright rims.

Rodolfo

Except the obvious near and far rim, still no significant features visible id 3D.

One of the first full filters color pic toward Beagle and Bright Spot (on the NEAR rim ).

Attaboy, Ant! Now if you can stitch on the rest of BC to the left, we'll get a decent look at this sucker.

Not possible , the sol 697 coming pictures does not show a panoramic view but only many pictures of different filters (from L2 to L7 and R1 to R7) on the same view.

Rodolfo