QUOTE (djellison @ Jul 19 2008, 11:36 AM) 
QTVR time 
DOUG!
you're killing me!
Fabulous! Thanks
Cheers
Full Version: The Peter Pan
DOUG!
you're killing me!
Fabulous! Thanks
Cheers
QUOTE (jekbradbury @ Jul 23 2008, 03:26 PM)
Here is The Peter Pan projected to a Vertical Projection, suitable for overlay on top of HiRISE images or simply for a birds-eye view:
Upsidedown?
I think north is at the bottom of that image.
Phoenix appears to be under attack by some sort of giant claw! 
Awesome perspective... what an amazing image (all of them).
Awesome perspective... what an amazing image (all of them).
NASA TV showed this image of the Panorama. If that's the official, 'complete' version... Then I guess I don't have to worry about replacing the 8X10 I made from the Pan that James did.
[quote name='punkboi' date='Jul 31 2008, 06:46 PM' post='121899']
NASA TV showed this image of the Panorama.
Whish has been released as PIA11007
But at low resolution. Will a larger resolution version be released?
Don
NASA TV showed this image of the Panorama.
Whish has been released as PIA11007
But at low resolution. Will a larger resolution version be released?
Don
I think this gets you to the press release page at the LPL site and you can select for download the 61MB version on the right
Looks to me that 61 MB version is magnified and it's not higher resolution than the "medium" res, 24 MB view since the panorama was taken in 2x2 binned mode.
Interesting. Why would they up-rez the thing?
Err, no. The green/blue were 2x2 binned but the red was at full resolution. (except for the deck which really was down sampled but their version doesn't include that anyway)
Hence why mine has similar dimensions to their large version. 26642 vs 26720 pixels for the full 360
Hence why mine has similar dimensions to their large version. 26642 vs 26720 pixels for the full 360
QUOTE (jamescanvin @ Aug 6 2008, 03:36 PM)
Err, no. The green/blue were 2x2 binned but the red was at full resolution.
Not true. All 3 filters were taken in 2x2 binned mode with the additional red frame (far red L1/R1) at full res, the one you're talking about. I'm not seeing the full res view used in the official version. You be the judge if this looks like a full res view in terms of crispness (of the red channel at least):
Click to view attachment
using the red channel from this image: http://www.met.tamu.edu/mars/i/SS015EFF897...4_11E1CR1M1.jpg
or rather this one: http://www.met.tamu.edu/mars/i/SS015EDN897...5_11E18RAM1.jpg
Counterintuitively, the binned frames are actually more blurry than full frames, one would not expect that given that binned frames depend less on camera point spread function. It's certainly not the case with say Cassini or MESSENGER binned imagery.
QUOTE (jamescanvin @ Aug 6 2008, 02:36 PM)
Err, no. The green/blue were 2x2 binned but the red was at full resolution.
QUOTE (ugordan @ Aug 6 2008, 02:49 PM)
Not true.
Well I would argue that that it was a true statement - I just omitted (forgot) the other red channel.
When you originally posted I only let the large file load as far at the met mast and that looked good to my quick glance but looking at some of the terrain does indeed show that a lot of detail has been lost compared to my version. How odd...
QUOTE (ugordan @ Aug 6 2008, 02:49 PM)
Counterintuitively, the binned frames are actually more blurry than full frames
I've wondered about that too. My guess was that the binned frames used a more lossy compression than the full frames. The SSI site talks about jpeg and Rice compression. The binned frames don't look like they're heavily jpeged, and I thought Rice was lossless, but a simple modification of Rice would effectively act like a spatial low-pass filter on the images, if I'm correct. That could explain what we're seeing.
Mark Lemmon clears up some of this...the short version is, no, you're not crazy, the binned images really are blurrier.
Hope that clears things up!
Emily
QUOTE
First, the binned images should look sharper (more aliased) than full-res images. They do not. There are a handful of bugs in SSI flight software, too small to get attention away from other aspects of the mission, large enough to annoy. In this case, it was discovered in December that the implementation of the binning makes it act as a type of low pass filter. In the absence of compression, that error is reversible. The compression makes it only partly reversible. The fix is simple, but that is not a major factor--replacing FSW is intrinsically complex. For reference, we had a patch to replace our auto-exposure algorithm in January. RAC was just allowed to use auto-exposure for the first time in flight a couple sols ago; SSI is still working on it. We've used manual exposures all mission long. That's despite the fact that we used auto-expose without issue in our readiness tests.
Second, there are more elements to putting the pan together than I can speak to. One element that I can, is that I never had time to use and check the upconversion routine (recovers full res from the binned images quite well) on all 300-some binned frames, and some form of simply scaling the images up was used instead, to the best of my knowledge. Phoenix is amazingly complex to operate, and the team is simply not big enough to be able to operate it well and do all the processing we would like. Doing the best job we can with the images is something that has to be deferred.
Third, I would expect a better version of same pan (better includes filling in the black spaces). That won't come until the ops pace has eased, certainly not until well after the disruptions of the next few weeks. In addition, the HEA pan has no binning, less compression in all filters, and little compression in stereo filters.
Second, there are more elements to putting the pan together than I can speak to. One element that I can, is that I never had time to use and check the upconversion routine (recovers full res from the binned images quite well) on all 300-some binned frames, and some form of simply scaling the images up was used instead, to the best of my knowledge. Phoenix is amazingly complex to operate, and the team is simply not big enough to be able to operate it well and do all the processing we would like. Doing the best job we can with the images is something that has to be deferred.
Third, I would expect a better version of same pan (better includes filling in the black spaces). That won't come until the ops pace has eased, certainly not until well after the disruptions of the next few weeks. In addition, the HEA pan has no binning, less compression in all filters, and little compression in stereo filters.
Hope that clears things up!
Emily
Hi,
I recently made a James Canvin's Peter Pan version for Stellarium. Very helpfull to see where is the sun and view when it will "touch" the ground.
Download here (zip archive)
Installation procedure are described in the read-me.
And screens :
Today midnight sun
Hope you will like it (if you are user of Stellarium)
I recently made a James Canvin's Peter Pan version for Stellarium. Very helpfull to see where is the sun and view when it will "touch" the ground
.Download here (zip archive)
Installation procedure are described in the read-me
.And screens :
Today midnight sun
Hope you will like it (if you are user of Stellarium)
That's really neat! I've used Stellarium before, it's a nice program. Is there any way to change the colour of the atmosphere?
Hi James
I've dragged the file and clicked on the landscapes tab but just get a list of four landscapes and no "Setting landscape updates the location" and choose "Mars". to cross this is in windows vista
Roy
oops old version of Stellarium, now downloading 0.9 this one should work thanks.
well tried that and have crossed the "Setting landscape updates the location" but still nothing happens.
I've dragged the file and clicked on the landscapes tab but just get a list of four landscapes and no "Setting landscape updates the location" and choose "Mars". to cross this is in windows vista
Roy
oops old version of Stellarium, now downloading 0.9 this one should work thanks.
well tried that and have crossed the "Setting landscape updates the location" but still nothing happens.
Hi James again
At last I've got it going, instead of dragging the file into texture/landscapes I dragged it into another landscapes folder that is at the same level as textures and not inside it.
Thanks James it looks great, now I'm off to play with it 
Roy
At last I've got it going, instead of dragging the file into texture/landscapes I dragged it into another landscapes folder that is at the same level as textures and not inside it.
Thanks James it looks great, now I'm off to play with it
Roy
Lol I redownloaded Stellarium just for this (I had uninstalled it a while back), and am not sorry I did, lol.
Very nice work!
Very nice work!
Yes, this works beautifully.
FYI - as Reckless said, for PC users put the 'PhoenixLandingSite' folder under \Program Files\Stellarium\landscapes\PhoenixLandingSite and then the rest of the steps as per the instructions in that folder's document.
Ant103 - this is absolutely excellent and I have already used it today in an outreach talk. Very effective! Thanks.
Astro0
PS: For anyone who doesn't know Stellarium get it here
PPS: Ant - I hope you don't mind, here's a little tweak of the PeterPan to which I've added the phantom robotic arm just to make Phoenix look complete.
Click to view attachment
How it looks...
Click to view attachment
FYI - as Reckless said, for PC users put the 'PhoenixLandingSite' folder under \Program Files\Stellarium\landscapes\PhoenixLandingSite and then the rest of the steps as per the instructions in that folder's document.
Ant103 - this is absolutely excellent and I have already used it today in an outreach talk. Very effective! Thanks.
Astro0
PS: For anyone who doesn't know Stellarium get it here
PPS: Ant - I hope you don't mind, here's a little tweak of the PeterPan to which I've added the phantom robotic arm just to make Phoenix look complete.
Click to view attachment
How it looks...
Click to view attachment
Thanks .
Astro0 : happy to see that it's usefull for you. And really like the adding of RA .
. Astro0 : happy to see that it's usefull for you
. And really like the adding of RA .
Those are simply astounding images guys - well done!
Two things - are there plans for another panoramic grand image just before Phoenix's mission ends in mid November? It might be useful to see any emerging ice/frost on the ground, cloudier skies and compare with the earlier images.
Another thing that has been niggling at me. Where precisely is Phoenix in terms of its regional location? I mean within a 30/50 km radius? Has anyone precisely determined the distant hills/craters seen from Phoenix and thus determined their and Phoenix's location? Can the rim of Heimdall, the crater seen in that spectacular shot of the landing last May, be seen in the distance from the Phoenix landing site?
Two things - are there plans for another panoramic grand image just before Phoenix's mission ends in mid November? It might be useful to see any emerging ice/frost on the ground, cloudier skies and compare with the earlier images.
Another thing that has been niggling at me. Where precisely is Phoenix in terms of its regional location? I mean within a 30/50 km radius? Has anyone precisely determined the distant hills/craters seen from Phoenix and thus determined their and Phoenix's location? Can the rim of Heimdall, the crater seen in that spectacular shot of the landing last May, be seen in the distance from the Phoenix landing site?
There is a lot of information on the landing site in this thread http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.p...t=0&start=0
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.