Hi Dilo, I'm struck your (btw. great) map dont match. Your "pano" seems to cover a larger surface area. Following my guess:

http://www.greuti.ch/oppy/oppy_map_sol545.jpg

What do you think, could it be?

Frankly, dunno... as showed below, if scale of R1500822 MOC image I used is 1.45m/pixel, the red circle has 150m diameter: Click to view attachment
Now, if distance from Erebus rim is really 150m, Oppy should now lie in the etched terrain indicated by A, while most of us think is near B (and you too).
Alternatively, Flight Director included in the crater definition the etched terrain in A...

I would not worry, flight director updates have been wrong/misworded in the past occasionally. I vividly remember the announcement that Oppy was leaving Endurance at some FD update, and that was before Oppy even had reached Wopmay. On the contrary, Oppy stayed inside and worked its way towards Burns Cliff.

I agree with Dilo, Oppy has to be at B. She has just now arrived at this first exposure of the Etched Terrain and we didn't see these evaporite windows until a few Sols ago. And if we were at A, the azimuth and distance to the R1 and R2 ridges would be different.

The next few Sols will tell.

In the meantime, lets have a look at that dark basal unit that is becoming more prevalent. My curiosity is killing me!

--Bill

Most definitely yes!

OK, I played a little bit with images and this is my personal assessment on Rover position:
Click to view attachment
On the right, I extended the last vertical (Pancam) projection and I'm almost sure of last Opportunit position identified in the small MOC inset...
On the left portion there are the Phil's Erebus map identifications, re-scaled and re-oriented, based on the R1 ridge azimut and terrain features.

All appear reasonable, but scale of this left portion should be about 2.4m/pixel! Interestingly, if we assume the same scale of right portion, the distance from closest "true" Erebus rim becomes 180m, close to the officual value
However, this imply that original MOC image scale of 1.45m/pixel is wrong , and I'm not very confortable with this conclusion...
Suggestions?

> Suggestions?

Yes.
Phil's picture --- the one you (me, and others) used as reference --- is taken from R1500822 but not at the same scale.
Here below you can see a selection from the named MOC image, without any re-scaling. If you plot again the two points of that 440m line on this image you'll get 1.4 m/pixel.

Click to view attachment

Tesheiner

Mmmm,

I'm not so confortable with my previous answer because I assumed you measured those 440m on the "wrong" image...

After reviewing again the data for image R1500822 on the MSSS site (http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/r10_r15/im...5/R1500822.html), I have found the following.

Our assumption about 1.45 m/pixel for that image comes from the parameter:

"Scaled pixel width: 1.45 meters"

But R1500822 has actually two versions, one map-projected and another not. The "map-projected" version is the nice one we all have seen here and on another places. But those 1.45 m/pix refers to the NOT map-projected image i.e. the "raw" picture, and is actually the *horizontal* resolution of the picture. The vertical resolution is 1.45 * 0.43 (pixel aspect ratio) = 0.6235 m/pix.

The map-projected image may have a different scale.

(edited to include reference picture) Click to view attachment

I downloaded the raw R1500822 image from the MSSS site and cropped the interesting part. This image has a resolution of 1.445m/pixel (width) and 0.625m/pixel (height).

The length of the white line (I tried to copy the 440m line in dilo's image above in the thread) comes out as 235m.

So, the 150m distance from Erebus mentioned by the flight director must mean the closest largest bright outcrop in the direction of the white line.

PS. Edited to attach a "1m/pixel in both directions" version of the image.

The raw (not projected) images show the huge vertical exageration of CPROTO - but the projected images are at the resolution specificed in both dimensions

Doug

Yes, but which is the resolution of that image?

Take this picture (Click to view attachment) as a reference. You can see Erebus at half-size in both map-projected and non map-projected images.
The distance between points A-B in the non-projected picture is 2 x 105 pixels @ 1.45 m/pix = 304.5 meters. On the map-projected picture this distance is about 2 x 199 pixels, which gives us an image scale of 0.765 m/pix (for the full resolution picture).

Similar exercise for C-D:

not projected: 2 x 262 pix. @ 1.45 * 0.43 m/pix = 326.7 m
projected: 2 x 221 pix ==> 0.74 m/pix

The net result is that the scale of R1500822 is about 0.75 m/pix.

... or there is something wrong on all this bunch of numbers. :-)

The odd thing is - the 0.7something m/pixel is actually a figure mentioned if you stumble across that MOC images via the PDS imaging node instead of straight thru the MSSS site.

http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/html/regionsk/07s007.htm

http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/html/r15001/r1500169.html
http://ida.wr.usgs.gov/html/r15008/r1500822.html

Doug

Thanks to all for great contribution!
Now I'm suspecting that Tesheiner hypothesis is right... they should introduce a more clear indication of scale (a ruler?) in each image, or a clear help on this item.

I told you the flight director was messing with us

"Opportunity is still about about 50 meters (164 feet) north of the "Erebus highway" -- an area the team suspects to be highly populated with outcrop and perhaps easier to navigate.
Opportunity is roughly 185 to 200 meters (607 to 656 feet) north of Erebus crater, the next large crater Opportunity will encounter."

From the latest JPL update:
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status.html

Hello Tesheiner,
I cannot figure out about pixels. Are these pixeles from the picture. I suspect that each pixel is a very small point from the picture? After, translating it that each ones measures an distance of as an example, 0.765 meters?

Rodolfo

This apparently is the "Ice Cream Cone?"

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all...0P0703L0M1.HTML

Be careful. 0.765 is the calculated scale/resolution of the full-scale image R01500822.

The example attached to my previous post is at half-scale - that's why you have those "2 x ..." on the equations.
If you want to calculate distances based on that scale parameter (and assuming it is correct ) you should use the map-projected images posted here (http://www.msss.com/moc_gallery/r10_r15/im...5/R1500822.html).
In case you want to do that on my example picture you should use 1.53 m/pix (2 x 0.765).

Yes it looks like that someone, maybe Oppy has a hidden ice cream, has spilt the ice cream over these dunes.

However, what I am seeing it is of the other perspective. It looks like that a previous lake was drained and left the floor full of cracks due to the process of draing. After a long period of time, the land became petrified. Later, came another flow of water and remained for a while and continues the same draining process. Every time the water comes by that land, creates a new layer of outcrop.

Rodolfo

I'm still amazed about how easy is to pick those rock outcrops from Dilo's vertical projection (continue updating it, please! ) and map them on the high-res MOC images...

Click to view attachment

This is an impressive piece of work, Thanks for the effort.

Thanks for that, it makes visualisation of the relationship between the scales of the MOC images and the vertical projections really clear. Unification of different scale imagery like this is great. I now know what the etched terrain is like and can mentally colourise the MOC image and visualise the scale of the rover in the satalite imagery far better than i could yesterday.

I suppose someone at JPL is putting together contiguous vertical projections of all the ground covered. I have seen the little tiny squres of this on done on the route maps but not good big images like Dilo's. It does suggest an awesome project to combine all the suitable images into a vertical projection of the route covered. It would be a heck of a magic carpet ride.

Dilo you've probably answerd this already but what is the virtual hight you are projecting the images from and does it differ from nav to pancam?.

Doug feel free to move this post to the imagery query section if neccessary.

Aaaaaarrgggggggg* powers of ten someone please.

With the remapped vertical projections dilos doing and the microscopic imager there is now the scope for a genuine continous zoom from ground-based mars as 'red dot' telescope imagery/HST/viking full disk image all the way throught the MOC images, dilos vertical projections, pancam close ups to the MI images of the blueberries. It'd be a hell of an ani-gif or QT movie.

*frustration at lack of skills i'm to busy to learn whilst writing up my dissertation.

Reminds me of comedian Steven Wright: "I have a full-scale map of the US. I don't know where to put it."

Oooh -- great idea! Someone do it, please!

Emily

Ha! look at the image on the cover of Science in this frame of the movie!

What is that on the cover? A picture from the Viking landers? It looks a bit old...

It's an *old* (but classic) film! And yes, it should be remade, perhaps with a Solar System bias, and for IMAX to boot!

Or, at the very least, as a teaser for HDTV (you listenin', Mr Sony?).

Here the updated vertical projections mosaic:
Click to view attachment

Paxdan, your idea about a superzoom from entire Mars to a MI rock detail is EXACTLY the same idea that hit me about a month ago...
I didn't find time to realize it (up to now), but for sure would be a great animation, especially if integrated with a 3D model of the rover...
About projections, I start from stitched, re-scaled images and I project them from a height of 1.5m (the supposed height of Navigation and Panoramic Cameras) above an absolutely flat soil. Projection images are ortographic ones (from top, without perspective) with a scale of 10cm/pixel...

Cheers for the maps Dilo. It's great to know other people think about the same stuff, and thanks for the projection info.

deglr6328, ha ha so well spotted. funny how these things can stray back on topic i wonder if it is also mars on the cover of scientific america below.

This is an example of what can be done MGS+route map in a bird's view...
(made with PovRay)

Dilo, it seems you approach the (PovRay) master more and more Or do you meet underhand Erwan Admit this truth!

However it's groovy! I can imagine it just like a 3D image with in the background a deep deep hole...

Dilo you have just made my mouth drop! That is one amazing peace of work.

A++++

Great work Dilo.

I'm starting to get the feeling we are going to be looking at one more -- albeit larger -- Vostok disappointment.

DILO - Sweet fancy moses - that's beautiful!

OK - So far my association with Unmanned Spaceflight has contributed to the tech economy by forcing new hard drive purchases and now I need to buy a large format printer!

(Maybe I should start a tally to see who's pics end up on my desktop most... I have a feeling there or 3 or 4 "masters" here that are evenly split.... Would something like that spur competition or seed discord? Hmmm)

Thank you dilo for the great and informing image, we're as far as I thought, even though I was thinking Opportunity were some tens of yards more to the left in that image. Good to know.

Tman, I'm definitvely NOT Erwann!
I followed your suggestion: Et-Voilà the HD version with Victoria on the horizon (I like it, you liked previous version, this should like even more this...):

Click to view attachment

For eventual technical questions, pls goto dedicated section...

dilo, that thing is just a beauty!! Best route map ever!!

I like they way Victoria is just lurking in the distance
It seems so close in this view!

maybe you should show your work to JPL? Sure they can't do better than this!

Thanks to dot.dk and all people appreciating this work...

Now imagine an animated version, with the Rover moving along the path!
Do someone know if there is, somewhere, a 3D model of MER (not necessarely too detailed)? Also 3DStudio file should work...

PS: Hey, is a shame to not have MRO highres imagery by now, it would be ideal to fill the resolution gap and make excellent route maps! unfortunately, MRO will start to take images when approximately both MER will be terminated!

Dilo, let me add my voice to the chorus -- this is how route maps should look!

JPL should see this!! And learn.

Just another voice added to the chorus of praise for Dilo's recent work. This is exactly what I have hoped to see for a long time. well done Dilo!

Phil

Dilo's work get better and better.
Roy F

Dilo,

in the lower right corner of the Combo 2 map you state Sol 436-450.

Is that right?

I think it must be Sol 536-550.

For the rest great pictures and maps.

jvandriel

I believe the rover drivers and route planners use imagery that has been fully corrected and reprojected into a virtual, 3D world. I'm pretty sure that most every pixel that comes down is assigned XYZ coordinates, so surely JPL can reproject them into any view that can be imagined.

Speaking of Virtual 3-D, is anyone out there up to making pseudo 3-D QuickTime presentations of some of those panoramas which we all know and love?

New (Aug 14) update from Steve at the Athena site:

http://athena.cornell.edu/news/mubss/

He talks mostly about Opportunity... but also mentions Spirit is finally making its assult on the summit!

Click to view attachment

MMB does "virtual 3-D" of just about all of them. Not stitched as seamlessly as those using pano tools, but realtime virtual reality. And full resolution.

Re: Latest Steve Squyres update... Steve is teasing us (I'm sure not intentionally) with images we haven't seen yet. Where is Exploratorium???

I check that Cornell Pancam Data Tracking site every now and then... (especially when there haven't been JPL updates for a few days) to see if I can find out what's going on. An entry from Spirit sol 573 has some pancam thumbnails which seem to be looking toward the summit.

(This is the EDR entry:
573 15:08:32 p2362.06. 1 0 0 8 0 0 8 pancam_drive_direction_2bpp_L7R1

I confess that I've not used MBB myself, but may well have a play!

The advantage of QT is that, as everybody has the player, they are essentially standalone goodies...

Oops, obviously you're right!
I will correct in the next release, thanks...