PDA

View Full Version : You just gotta love Shadows



MicroKid
2004-Sep-03, 02:15 AM
Guys,

Have a look at the bright spot and resultant shadow change (object on the right side) in the left / right pan cam blinker from Opportunity Sol 16.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/ShadowBlink1.gif

Here is the object on Sol 37 in colour:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Blinker.jpg

MicroKid

Humphrey
2004-Sep-03, 02:20 AM
Its morse code!!! :o

MicroKid
2004-Sep-03, 02:36 AM
Hi Humphrey,

Yup, you can pickup either polarity and it's a lot stronger / closer than the recent SETI signal.

But just maybe the lower "Limb" raised up a bit, caught the light and cast the shadow. But then it would need to be ........ alive?

MicroKid

01101001
2004-Sep-03, 03:22 AM
Have a look at the bright spot and resultant shadow change (object on the right side) in the left / right pan cam blinker from Opportunity Sol 16.

Would you please include a pointer to the original raw images -- not just the sol? Your images are so blown up that I can't spot the originals.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-03, 04:21 AM
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129615882EFF0322P2260L7M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129615882EFF0322P2260R1M1.JPG

I use the .img files from the NoteBook site but the .jpg files still show the event.

MicroKid

01101001
2004-Sep-03, 06:36 AM
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129615882EFF0322P2260L7M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129615882EFF0322P2260R1M1.JPG
Thanks. That helped me identify the bright spot as one also seen at the same pixel location on, at least:

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129615928EFF0322P2260R1M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129616521EFF0322P2260R1M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129617432EFF0322P2260R1M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/016/1P129617831EFF0322P2260R1M1.JPG

I stopped looking after seeing it several times. I looked at a couple of right-pancam non-filter-1 images and didn't see it, so it's most likely a boring dust spot on the filter -- rather than an exciting Martian animal. Sigh.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-03, 09:07 AM
Hi Binary,

I'll have a look at the images you indicated.

As an amateur telescope maker and photographer of many years I can tell you a dust spot on a filter would be so far out of focus the only effect it would cause would be to slightly reduce contrast. Even if it could produce a tight image of a few pixels, it would be a dark spot and not a bright spot. A bright spot could only be produced by a CCD fault. Then of course there is the shadow.

Back to the drawing board.

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-03, 10:29 AM
Hi Binary,

After looking at your linked pam cam R1 images, plus many more, it would seem there is a single pixel on the right CCD of Opportunity with enhanced sensitivity to the light wavelengths passed by the right #1 filter. It's location varies somewhat from 248,200 to 249,201. The other pixels around it seem to have normal spectral sensitivity.

In my opinion, this one pixel of enhanced sensitivity would not cause the totality of the bright spot let alone cause the shadow. In my opinion the thread is still open.

Over to you.

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-03, 11:14 AM
Guys,

Seems there are a few sensitive pixels:

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/210/1P146824575EFF35BGP2567R1M1.JPG

Here is a blowup of the result around pixel 248,200:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/1P146824575EFF35BGP2567R1M1pixel.jpg

One bad pixel does not a object or shadow make.

MicroKid

Swift
2004-Sep-03, 03:21 PM
Its morse code!!! :o
I thought it was a tiny Martian lighthouse (there was water on Mars you know). 8-[

Irishman
2004-Sep-03, 08:00 PM
I need more help than that to find the location in the full-size images.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-04, 02:48 AM
Hi IrishMan,

You need a graphic program which can indicate pixel coordinates. Try Irfanview. It's very good.

http://www.irfanview.com/

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-04, 02:51 AM
Hi Swift,

It's more than the brighter area, it's the shadow that was cast which make this event noteworthy.

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-04, 04:47 AM
Guys,

Here is the raw .jpg pixel map from the left and right pam cams with filter 1:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Shadow3d2.jpg

I think it is very clear there are many more than one rogue pixel involved here.

MicroKid

01101001
2004-Sep-04, 05:28 AM
I think it is very clear there are many more than one rogue pixel involved here.

Why?

jt-3d
2004-Sep-04, 05:42 AM
Ok I'll count them. One.

That was kind of trollesque so I'll add that a few others change to white but they are already light gray to start with. I'm not calling any press conference.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-04, 06:43 AM
Guys,

I think you misunderstood what I said so here it is again.

One rogue pixel did not cause the totality of the image change. There were many other pixel changes involved.

Here I have modified the rogue pixel value down from 255 to 127 and the effect is still very clear.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/ShadowBlink2.gif

This image was made from the Mer Analyst Notebook site Sol 16 .img files, converted and stretched to .gif via NasaView, aligned, cropped and resampled by Stereo Image Maker and the made into a gif blinker by Advanced Gif Animator.

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-07, 12:37 AM
Guys,

Here is a marked up colour photo of the shadow site showing the viewing pathway and that there was nothing (bumps in the rock slab or BBs) obscuring the shadow during the two shots.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Blinker1.jpg

Here is another ShadowBlinker to see the viewing pathways:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/ShadowBlinker8.gif

MicroKid

Tom Ames
2004-Sep-07, 03:55 AM
Guys,

Here is a marked up colour photo of the shadow site showing the viewing pathway and that there was nothing (bumps in the rock slab or BBs) obscuring the shadow during the two shots.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Blinker1.jpg

Here is another ShadowBlinker to see the viewing pathways:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/ShadowBlinker8.gif

MicroKid

Tell me: what do you think this blip is?

MicroKid
2004-Sep-07, 05:36 AM
Hi Tom,

Thanks for the reply.

I think something happened / changed which is evidenced by the multiple pixel changes. Without being there it is very difficult to tell WHAT caused the change. All I can say for sure is that there was an increased albedo in one area and a resultant shadow. Logic would suggest something changed, reflected some light and caused the resultant shadow.

Looking at the colour photo of the object suggests it doesn't look too much "rock like" but I'm just an engineer who has done some caving and rock picking but would not consider myself an expert on geological rock formations.

Can you classify the object as something geological which some examples?

I have other photographic evidence of significant changes in other objects which are again supportative of something changing so to me this is not a one off event.

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-08, 02:01 AM
Tom, Guys,

For those gifted with the ability to see xeyed images you just might find this dual image pair of interest:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Big3dBlinker.gif

Another "Blip"????

MicroKid

MicroKid
2004-Sep-08, 02:04 PM
Another "Blip". Watch those "Jaws"!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Jaws4.gif

MicroKid

gritmonger
2004-Sep-08, 02:40 PM
You are looking at different times of day, different perspectives, and with blurred/cropped images that have interpolated pixels. It would better help your case if you could use images from the same time of day, mapped or or at most rotated to the same perspectives, and with a minimum of pixel interpolation and "smoothing" as possible. Information is lost and removed/dropped every time the original data is manipulated; this is part of the reason for apparent 'structure' in jpeg compressed images, which compress by averaging the value (black-white balance) of a group of 8x8 (64) pixels to near that of a single "key" pixel in the upper left of the group, resulting in apparent square artifacts which are not part of the original data.

Data can be manipulated to bring out many details that are more part of the CCD, processing, compression and transmitting process than Martian landscape.

gritmonger
2004-Sep-08, 02:45 PM
Much more interesting are these images - from the last sets before "lights out" for Opportunity - which appear to show rather crusty/squidgy "dust" around some of the nodules
Look at the center-bottom of the image (http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/m/221/1M147802811EFF35CCP2905M2M1.HTML)
...and what for all the world looks like the close-up remnants of a small wash...
Edges and some apparent outflow (http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/220/1P147721288EFF35CCP2425R1M1.HTML)

MicroKid
2004-Sep-09, 12:26 AM
Guys,

"Jaws" links:

Closed:
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/177/1P143895344EFF3336P2404L2M1.JPG
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/177/1P143895344EFF3336P2404R2M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/p/177/1P143895377EFF3336P2404L2M1.JPG

Open:
http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/n/181/1N144257552EFF3370P1981L0M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/n/181/1N144257552EFF3370P1981R0M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/n/181/1N144257604EFF3370P1981L0M1.JPG

http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/all/1/n/181/1N144257604EFF3370P1981R0M1.JPG

I'd say it was an "Open and Shut" case that the object showed significant movement between the Oppy Sol 177 pan and Oppy Sol 181 nav cam shots.

MicroKid

Irishman
2004-Sep-10, 08:33 PM
Okay, I finally figured out the location on the big picture in question. Gee, that's a tiny feature. Most of the "shadow" variation between the two images is grayscale fluctuation at the resolution limit of the jpegs if not the original. It is easily interpreted as compression noise from the difference in viewing angle.

The bright spot does stand out. It does not appear to be a feature becoming lit from the different angle. The bright spot is surrounded by the dark shadow on the rock face, and does not appear to be a protrusion. As to what causes it, I can't even speculate.

Regarding the "Jaws" feature, I can't even tell what you are labeling "Jaws", or open and closed.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-12, 06:05 AM
Hi Irishman,

This blinker should help to spot the "Jaws":

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/Jaws4.gif

By the way, the other shots (of the bright spot and resultant shadow) were made from the original .img files and not .jpg. Converted them into .jpg (for web site posting) at the last stage of image processing.

MicroKid

Irishman
2004-Sep-13, 08:36 PM
Regarding "Jaws", the viewing angle is different and the lighting is different. That explains why the rock looks different.

Regarding the other images, you're looking at tiny variation at the resolution limit of the image. That's in the noise. The white spot is a curiosity, but the rest is just fuzziness.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-13, 10:57 PM
Hi Irishman,

Ref Shadow event.

Have a look at the original .img shots. The shadow and brighter area are not pixel errors or unsignificant. Either event by itself would be hard to hang a hat on but combine both events (brighter area and darker shadow) and one is lead to consider the darker shadow event was caused by the brighter area event.

Ref open "Jaw".

Changing the lighting angle can only effect shadows and the level of light reflected from individual surface features. Surface featured should stay constant, just be at different light levels. The open "Jaw" is a VERY significant feature yet it is totally not there in the other view. I have played with gamma and contrast yet the open "Jaw" is just not there.

MicroKid

Irishman
2004-Sep-14, 05:40 PM
The Jaws rock from overhead, look closely at the contour of the surface on the left side. There is a ridge, a raised lip. The opening is a depression behind that lip. From the top angle you can see the opening, in shadow because of the lighting angle. That opening is covered by the raised lip from the other angle. You can't see it because it is below the surface of the rock from that view. You see the high point, not the low point behind it. Like seeing the valley on the far side of the mountain.

MicroKid
2004-Sep-15, 08:50 AM
Hi Irishman,

Thanks for the reply.

What is missing in the lower down view is the "Upper Jaw":

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/MissingTopJaw.gif

The two "Eyes" can be seen in both series but it is the missing "Upper Jaw" which caught my eye.

I don't think there are "Eyes" or a "Jaw" just using those names make it easier to spot what I'm discussing.

There is an even earlier pan cam series which is again different and suggests the object was lying behind the part which goes into the soil.

From Pam 143630713:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/JawFirst.jpg

From Pam 143895344: (73.5 hours later than above)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/JawSecond.jpg

From Nav 144257552: (100.6 hours later than above)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/JawThird.jpg

And finally from Nav 144257604 (52 seconds later than the above)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v376/MicroKid/JawFourth.jpg

I don't know what it is but it seems to move.

MicroKid