1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 Next
Author Message

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 9:01 AM 

Time for a new topic.

This topic is a logical continuation of the topic Curious about Curiosity - which was getting too long.

Sol 52 enhanced difference false color of the Glenelg area:


I can't see three "distinct" soil units - yet. Perhaps some infrared views will be taken "soon".


Posts: 3062

Reply: 1

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 11:06 AM 

Just adding a post to help get the topic started.

This is just one of my collection of images that appear to show rinds. This time from Curi



Posts: 3465

Reply: 2

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 4:41 PM 

sol 0053 3D false color of first target rock in Glenelg area:

with location links and a set of false color MAHLI ( MI ) images of the rock.

There was a rapid time series of several spots on the rock.

Wonder what that observing program was about?


Posts: 3465

Reply: 3

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 4:52 PM 

sol 0053 enhanced brightness difference animation of ???:

You must view the original size to see the animation.

I have no idea what was being observed in this sequence.

I thought - aha - dust devil - but the image doesn't concentrate on the distant horizon;

And then I thought - aha - photometric time series - but the time imterval ( 13 seconds ) between shots is too short;

And then I thought - aha - ( I have a lot of aha ha ha moments ) its a cloud movie - but most of the frame is not sky;

And then I thought - aha - looking for dust movement from wind gusts - but again - too short a time interval. Unless the cameras can be triggered by the weather instruments ( which I doubt );

And then I though - WTF are "they" looking for?

Any ideas?

Kye Goodwin

Posts: 1166

Reply: 4

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 6:26 PM 

Horton, Wow! I'm overwhelmed. Thanks for all the new stuff and for starting this thread. I'm more dependent than ever, over here at Gale, on your working up the raw images into something better.

This MSL MI camera has variable focus. Do you know an easy way to determine the size of objects in the micro-images?

Glenelg definitely has at least two different kinds of rock as predicted: one with coarse inclusions and one with uniformly fine grain. In one of Horton's panoramas there is very familiar looking layering in some of the fine-grained rock.


Posts: 3062

Reply: 5

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 7:58 PM 


In your reply #3, the pebbles are, as expected, unmoving and solidly placed in your absolutely perfectly registered gif but the matrix in which they sit appears to be changing. I suspect that lighting differences could explain some of the apparent movement, except that the pebbles and their shadows are themselves apparently immobile. I wonder what else could be responsible for the changes in the matrix, moisture?



Posts: 3062

Reply: 6

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 8:21 PM 

Here's one of those MAHLI images showing lots of light coloured dust particles, totally reminiscent of the dust particles captured by the Phoenix lander instruments. Its a auto white balanced and levelled sol 54 MAHLI image.

In addition there are some dark coloured aggregations that i would really like to see what they truly look like in the original un-downsampled images.

I wonder if the point of the animation Hort talks about was to see what these little whos might be doing on the surface.



Posts: 3062

Reply: 7

PostPosted: September 30, 2012 10:22 PM 

Another image from today's (sol 54) Curi releases. Auto white balanced and levelled in Gimp.

At first sight (33% magnification), It looks like its covered in something similar to fungal mycelium. However that impression is lessened on examining at 100%.

The texture is nevertheless interesting and appears to conceal some dark spore like bodies.


Kye Goodwin

Posts: 1166

Reply: 8

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 2:07 AM 

Here's a piece of rock with eroded layering that reminds me of Homeplate. In the lower right corner:

Layered rock is very common on Mars.

Mark Wilson

Posts: xxx

Reply: 9

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 4:18 AM 

@post no. 3; Perhaps it's a transit shadow?

@post no. 8. Yes, I also thought back to Spirit and Homeplate when I saw those layered rocks, very similar.

Spirit sol 748 raw images of Homeplate:




Posts: 3465

Reply: 10

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 6:51 AM 

sol 0054 extremely peculiar MAHLI 3D effect:

Er, what?! The 3D is "un-physical". I don't know what I'm seeing at all.

If you have trouble seeing 3D try following this animation. Notice that parts of the image shift in unison.

That creates the sharp unphysical boundaries in the 3D.

Maybe I need more sleep.

I would appreciate any comments on this very odd effect.

John Henry Dough

Posts: xxx

Reply: 11

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 10:12 AM 

Well ,,,,,after my last post I should feel ashamed but I do not,,,,what I do feel is very deep disappointment that I assumed falsely
that the MSL would contain a drill,,,an actual auger type drill as used for soil sampling on Tera Firma...Wrong,,,No Drill,,something that they call a rock drill,,,for whatever reason they would wish to drill into a rock....Moses
was the last one I knew of to get water from a rock...I don't think there will be many more posts with the John Henry Dough at the end of them...NASA has to me shown an incredible lack of common sense in not including a means of sampling,sub-surface,
and,, I don't see another Rover in my life time expectancy,,as I am 66,,,,,,soooo,,,its
been fun but not real fun ie: its un-real
that MSL has no way of observing anything that may be happening sub-surface,
Ben I pray for your health,,to the rest of you I say ,,happy hunting.
John Dough


Posts: 692

Reply: 12

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 10:42 AM 

#10: Horton, I've trouble to see this image in "true" 3D, but the boundaries give a kind of zoom or offset effect, especially seen on the right corner, seems closer than the rest of this image. How is this possible, the MAHLI cam consists of only one lens, right?


Posts: 344

Reply: 13

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 11:08 AM 

Looking at that image in enhanced stereo, it appears that the middle part of the image is levitating above the similar looking stuff below it. Also a piece of the left edge with different-looking stuff appears to be matched to the levitating part.

It appears to me that some kind of software glitch has stitched two separate images together in a garbled way. Possibly an on-board software glitch?


Posts: 3465

Reply: 14

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 12:04 PM 

Mizar, yes, the MAHLI has just one lens - but it is easy to fake 3D by moving the camera a bit ( 3D offset ) and taking a second picture.

I was looking for a 3D offset image when I discovered the weird 3D.

There is other weirdness in the MAHLI sequence - including what looks like grossly overexposed and underexposed frames - and rapid sequence of exposures ( about 2 seconds between exposures ) without changing the camera position. ( These may be rapid changes in the focus as most of the images are still thumbnails. )

The image guys may just be putting the camera through checkout tests - but I have no idea what was being tested in the sequence in the animation and the 3D.

Mark Wilson

Posts: xxx

Reply: 15

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 1:07 PM 

The MAHLI camera can take up to 8 images at varied focal distances and merge them into a single image with greater depth of field than a single image.

This is an eg in the links below: the BW image is a kind of focus "mask" of the final colour image...or something like that.


Posts: 250

Reply: 16

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 1:55 PM 

Sounds like they planned for using focus stacking / hyperfocus imagery (see ). Still Hortons re.10 animation looks weird as parts of the motive seems to move instead of the focus only.


Posts: 3465

Reply: 17

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 3:05 PM 

sol 0055 5x1 pan after guestimated 30 meter move:

Well, that was quick.

Thanks Mark and MPJ for the heads up on the built-in extended depth of field capabilities of the MAHLI. I would not have guessed...

That camera "feature" ( not a bug? ) is the most likely explanation of some of the MAHLI weirdness - and a warning about how the images should be viewed. ( With caution. )

My new HS30EXR also has such a built-in capability. So far I haven't tested the EXR High Resolution Priority mode. Maybe I'll give it a try so I can see what weirdness results from such software manipulations.

This brings up the entire issue of what is a "real" digital picture.

When the camera is routinely making decisions combining multiple exposures over time and space - setting white balances, adjusting dynamic contrast - picking and choosing what pixels to use from each image - then what can be believed? What is "real" and what is a processing artifact?

I have already noticed some strangeness in some of the very fine detail produced by my new HS30EXR camera.

Some of the pictures have verged on the magical. But as one of Clark's Laws states: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

This does not mean that all magic must be accepted as advanced technology! Sometimes the magic is just wrong.

Who needs a puny human playing with Photoshop to fake a picture one pixel at a time when glorious programs employing multiple CPUs, graphics accelerators, customized circuits all driven by 10s of thousands lines of code can create The Architect's "matrix reality" in the eye ( camera ) itself?

It is clear to me now that we will see only the Mars the camera designers will allow us to see.

I don't plan on processing any more MAHLI images. What you see is what you get.


Posts: xxx

Reply: 18

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 6:11 PM 

Mike Malin was asked at one of the press conferences how to see if a MAHLI picture was produced using the extended depth of field capability.

He replied something to the effect that it can be seen in the raw image flow since it will ALWAYS be accompanied by weird-looking grayscale images showing (somehow) how it was produced...

Also about your perplexing animation of the short-timespan navcam images; Certainly not sure, but doesn't it show some object crossing the sky (visible in two of the frames)? Everything else appears to be just noise/lightning variations. Guess it is a low-orbit natural or artifical satellite.



Posts: 1

Reply: 19

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 6:17 PM 

That effect reminds me of the 3D pictures with complex digital patterns that resolve themselves into pretty images on focusing. But it seems to have lost data on those 'unphysical' boundaries, or is that also an illusion. Very strange.


Posts: 3465

Reply: 20

PostPosted: October 1, 2012 6:54 PM 

sol 0054 12x2 false color pan of, er, Glenelg dried river bed???:

Warning: very big panorama.

newboy, your reaction to the 3D was exactly the same reaction I had to the image. I kept looking for the dog. Ah, there he is, wagging his cloud tail.

jj, only 512x512 navcam images were taken - and in the daytime. I don't think an artificial satellite could be seen in the daytime.

Mark Wilson's suggestion of looking for a Phobos transit dimming of the ambient light is the only one that makes any sense - but with auto exposure the navcam would compensate for the dimming with a longer exposure - which we wouldn't see in the JPG images.

Anyway enjoy the pan.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 Next

Join the conversation:

Very Happy Smile Sad Surprised
Shocked Confused Cool Laughing
Mad Razz Embarassed Crying or Very Sad
Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Wink
Powered by MTSmileys