First Stereograms of Mars from Spirit

An anonymous reader writes "NASA has made the first stereo image pairs from Spirit available. I've made stereo anaglyphs and arranged the full-size images side-by-side for stereo viewing. These are from the low-res black and white hazard avoidance camera, but still very cool. Anxiously awaiting the first stereo pairs from the panoramic cameras!"

Extremely cool

[ebob]

The parallel approach works for me and it's very cool. Much better than the ugly red/blue tint that you get with the anaglyphs. The cross-eyed approach just makes my eyes hurt.

You just have to let your eyes relax and just sort of nudge the two images into convergence.

The only problem is convincing your friends and family that it works and trying to instruct them how to do it.

anaglyph

[sharph]

I do have 3-D glasses. I don't understand why hes using JPEGs. They just introduce ghosting. Especially with the darker ones.

PNGs are good for this sort of thing.

I believe JPEG also has a RGB mode which will eliminate ghosting.

Stereo images

[grub]

If you have an nvidia card with the latest 3D stereo drivers you can run 3D LCD shutter glasses (assuming your monitor can run ~120 hz or better) and view JPS images in "real" 3D. All JPS images are are 2 JPGs side by side which the viewer splits in half and displays one half at a time per screen refresh.

I've made a few of my own JPS images simply by taking two pictures with my digital camera a few centimeters offset and combining the two resulting JPGs into one JPS file.

Re:Maestro

[LiquidCoooled]

you dont yet, they will release detailed imagery and data updates packages as it they are constructed.

Check back on their website - they estimate about one update per week.

Re:I'll ask

[Yaztromo]

Okay, where can I get some blue and red 3D glasses in this day and age?

The August 1998 issue of National Geographic came with two pairs, ironically enough to view stereo images as taken by NASA's last successful Mars lander, Pathfinder.

That's what I used to view the current images. So if you know someone with a National Geographic collection dating back that far you can borrow them, or if you're really keen you can head down to your local library, find the issue in question (hopefully with at least one pair of the glasses still inside), take it to an available library internet terminal, bring up the page in question, and view away.

Yaz.

Re:Extremely cool

[helix400]

If you put your finger 3 inches from your eyes, and stare at it, your eyes will look and feel crossed. That's how it will sorta feel if you do the cross-eyed method. If you stare far away, say, at a distant landmark, your eyes do the opposite of crossing, they spread out. This is sorta how parallel feels.

For more detail, the parallel is where your left eye looks at the left image, and your right eye looks at the right image (which is why they call it parallel, if you were to draw lines from your eyes to the picture they're looking at, you'd have to parallel lines).

The cross-eyed is the opposite. If you were to draw lines from eyes to picture, you'd see them cross.

In my opinion, cross-eyed method is easiest. If you can cross you eyes on two images, and you have enough eye control to force one "phantom" image to lay on top of another "phantom" image (from your other eye), bingo, it'll automatically work. It also has the nice bonus of being able to "touch" what you see. It also lets you cross-eye stuff many many inches apart, while parallel only lets you do maybe 3 inches max.

Why does this seem familiar?

[blair1q]

Didn't Popular Science publish 3-D photos taken by the Viking mission to Mars [nasa.gov]in the 1970s?

Oh, by the way, here's the link I found that page at [nasa.gov]. Just leave the Karma on the dresser.

Re:Anyone know the stereo separation on these?

[srw]

30cm with 1 degree toe-in. Ya, close stuff can hurt a bit to view.

WOHOO I CAN see these damm things

[MajorDick]

Well I dug up my stereoscope viewer, dusted it off printed out 2 images, and pasted on a piece of cardboard, a little adjusting and VOILA ....REALLY COOL 3D, I found this link [yesmag.bc.ca] to build your own stereoscope, quite a bit different from mine but works on the same principals.

Build your own stereoscope to view these

[MajorDick]

Well, as I posted before I cant see these things without a Stereoscope, if you dont have an antique stereoscope lying around like I do

I found this HERE [yesmag.bc.ca] and HERE [funsci.com] is a bit better one (more like mine:)

The second one gives a couple of different types , the 3x9 is for using cards like I made for mine or viewing the old cards from before like 1900 ish.

Jiggy-Vision

[boatboy]

I've created a quick Jiggy-Vision view [danielroot.com] of one of the sets.

3-D pairs from Viking/Pathfinder's landing site

[flug]

Just FYI, and in a similar vein, when Pathfinder landed in 1999 I made a page with stereo pairs of the landing area (using images from Viking). Some of the hills, craters, etc., are pretty breathtaking when viewed in 3-D. Pathfinder landing site in 3-D [brenthugh.com] Some interesting views taking from the Pathfinder lander, in stereo are here [stereoscopy.com]. --B

Re:Cross eyed vs. parallel stereo vision?

[Decimal Dave]

The cross-eyed pairs are where your left eye looks at the right picture and your other eye looks at the left picture. On the linked story page, these are the two left-most images.

I think the parallel stereograms (left image->left eye, right image->right eye) are easier and more comfortable to view because there is less perspective distortion as each eye can be directly in front of the part it needs to see. The two center images on the page make a parallel stereo pair. To view these, just look at some imaginary point several feet behind your display. When you do this, everything close to you will appear in double. Relax your eyes and adjust them so the two stereo images converge (you may have to tilt your head a little to get them perfectly horizontal). When the images overlap enough, your eyes will automatically "lock on" and a glorious patch of 3D will appear!

Re:Extremely cool

[EvanED]

There are good explanations here, but a picture is worth a thousand words, so... http://www.vision3d.com/3views.html

Tips For Viewing

[aldheorte]

The first images are not very good ones to start with. I suggest browsing down to the first set of images that do not have parts of the rover in them (a set of small hills on the horizon). Also, try resizing the browser so that only the two images you are trying to combine are in view and place the browser on a plain background such as a reasonably uncluttered desktop. Try both the cross-eyed and parallel set of images if you do not know your method - you'll know when you have it right because there will be a slight topographic roll to the surface nearby.

Once you get those, try keeping your eyes situated in the same position and scrolling the other images up or down into your field of view without looking up or down. This will allow you to view the more difficult images with parts of the rover in them, which have sharp depth transitions between the solar panels, airbags, and ground.

Re:Almost every picture from Spirit is a pair

[jaymzter]

Perhaps this [nasa.gov] was the page?

Quicktime VR Composite

[ashkar]

Quicktime VR available on SpaceRef here [spaceref.com].

3D Glasses sources...

[Kancept]

For those not lucky enough to own tons of these, or too cheap tp run to OfficeMax and grab 2 pieces of colored projector acetate, I present you with dirt cheap and free 3D glasses sources....

1 [stereoscopy.com]
2 [spacekids.com]
3 [rainbowsymphony.com]
4 [photo3-d.com] -- (RC 912 being my favorite ones...)
5 [poptwist.com] -- (This lovely book has a set of glasses, and a REAL reason to own a pair...)

Re:Mars: Reach out and touch it.

[kevcol]

Nice idea, Bruce Dern.

For those that don't know [shipofdreams.net] what he is talking about. [imdb.com]

Great movie. Except the syrupy Joan Baez tunes.

I don't see stereo images...

[mOoZik]

I believe the original poster is mistaken, or I'm not seeing it. The little square images are parts of the mosaic which comprise the panorama. They are NOT taken with the stereo camera as far as I can tell.

Image Quality

[jensen404]

A few of you have complained about the quality of the images. At the time the pictures were transmited, the rover only had its less powerfull (low bandwidth) antenna deployed.

from:
http://spaceflightnow.com/mars/mera/statu s.html

MONDAY, JANUARY 5, 2004
0610 GMT (1:10 a.m. EST)
"A few minutes before 12:30 a.m. EST today, the first direct-to-Earth communications session over the high-data-rate antenna began"

So, we should be seeing better images soon.

Re:Stereo images

[Jugalator]

... and here's the latest 3D stereo drivers [nvidia.com].

Re:The Gray Planet

[Jugalator]

So why are all the pictures black and white?

Because they aren't using their color cam yet.

Re:Extremely cool

[Anonymous Coward]

I have no problem staring at a finger 3 inches
from my face. I can't get my eyes to _focus_
on a more distant point, though. The difference
in focus between something at 3 inches and
3 feet is just too much.

For parallax viewing I just relax. Pretend
I'm looking really far away. The difference
in focus between something at 3 feet versus
30 feet is much smaller, so it's easier to
get my eyes to do that.

Re:so where's the color photos from JPL?

[imac_mafia]

If Mars had a blue sky, they would happily release photos showing it. But Mars' sky is an orange/pink/tan color for well-documented, well-known, and readily-understood reasons.

Mars' atmosphere is not dense enough to cause the light-scattering and light-filtering which makes Earth's sky appear blue. However, the Martian atmosphere is loaded with suspended dust particles. (Remember, this is the planet which is sometimes almost entirely shrouded by colossal, seasonal dust storms.)

The dust particles in Mars' thin atmosphere are larger than what we usually find in our own atmosphere. The large dust particles scatter longer wavelengths of light--i.e., the red spectrum. Thus, the pinkish tan color of Mars' atmosphere.

Here's some excellent information about the color of the sky on Mars [webexhibits.org].

See? A little education and science goes a long way to calm and debunk conspiracy paranoia. ;)

Re:NASA request: not just JPEGs!

[jensen404]

They used a low bandwith antenna to transmit these images. They were only able to get them posted online so quickly by getting them from the Rover at low quality. They now have the better antenna online, as I mentioned in this post [slashdot.org]

The NASA website calls them RAW images. The Rover may have sent the images in JPEG format. The term RAW most likely isn't refering to the RAW image that the camera captured, because then it would probably be much larger and in color.

Re:so where's the color photos from JPL?

[imac_mafia]

The Pathfinder/Sojourner mission only had enough energy (they thought) for 7 days of activity on mars, so they planned a tight, fast mission and hurried everything very quickly to make use of the very limited energy. Sojourner landed on Mars on July 4, 1997, and these images [sgi.com] were returned to Earth that same day. Of course, the energy supply turned out to last well longer than the planned mission, so the mission was extended. (The last data successfully retrieved from Sojourner was on Sept. 26, 1997.)

Spirit is an entirely different story. The images we've seen so far are just from positioning/navigation cameras which only image in b&w. But I believe the first color images from the high-res, color cameras are due to reach us any time now. We should have high-res color pics sometime today.

Spirit has far better batteries, lots more energy, and a much longer mission schedule. Where Sojourner was expected to run for just 7 days, Spirit and Opportunity are expected to run for 90 days. The mission schedules this time are more deliberate and meticulous.

Today Spirit is going to begin to put down it's wheels and "stand up." But that whole process with take two days. And it won't actually roll off the pad and onto Martian soil until the 9th or 10th day after the landing.

So just have patience. We should see the first color pictures today, and Spirit will start puttering around the surface by the middle of next week.

Failure to provide instant gratification isn't a sign of general failure, nor an indicator of conspiracy. ;)

* Here's the Mars Pathfinder mission web site [sgi.com]

* And here's an overview of the current Spirit & Opportunity missions [nasa.gov].

Here is the GOOD INFO on Spirit Rover and Mars

[dekashizl]

I've been poking around for hours trying to find photos, information, etc., and realized that it's very hard to find the good stuff, but that a LOT of it is out there. So I made this page (address below) and will continue to maintain it. It has (among other things) links to:

• history on ALL past Mars attempts (those poor soviets...)
• *many* JPL and NASA pages, diagrams, videos, and photos
• info on sterescopic photos
• Sterescopic layout of Spirit's first round of photos
• Quicktime VR of the Spirit's panoramic view
• etc.

Here is the page:
2004 Mars Exploration Rover Mission History and Highlights:
http://axonchisel.net/etc/space/mars-exp-rover-hig hlights.html?s=sd [axonchisel.net]

Re:Stereo images

[mav[LAG]]

Developers might also want to check out Open SceneGraph [sourceforge.net] which has the ability to automatically output your game/flight sim/visualisation project in stereo at the flick of an environment variable.

Nav Cam

[SmilingBoy]

These are from the low-res black and white hazard avoidance camera

In fact, all but the bottom ones are from the Navigation cameras, which sit on top of the mast as well, just inside of the Hi-Res Panorama Camera. The Nav Cam has a resolution of 512x512, but these pictures were taken with 256x256. The Panorama Cam has a resolution of 1024x1024.

Re:These pictures

[Buran]

That's because the high-gain antenna wasn't deployed until last night, and these pictures were sent before then.

Anaglyphs aren't generally done in color anyway -- it can work but only with certain "neutral" tones that are the same brightness through both red and green/cyan cellophane used in 3D glasses -- because the colors in the color photo can interfere with the anaglyphic process and skew the brain's perception of the 3D effect. Color pictures of Mars are a no-no - you DO NOT use images of red or green/blue objects or you'll ruin the effect entirely as one eye will see the red/blue objects much more brightly than the other. For this reason, Sports Illustrated Magazine's special issue for the Olympics a few years ago ran an apology for not having any anaglyphic shots of the Chinese athletes ... because they wore red uniforms.

Step one in the process I use to make anaglyphs: Strip out color (convert to greyscale). I work in an electron microscopy research lab and we process nearly everything into anaglyph format, so I do this all the time. You can fiddle with the gamma/brightness/contrast all you want, but color is a no-no. This means that when I make my own color anaglyphs (with better alignment than the ones linked in the article) -- looking forward to the high-res shots -- the color goes poof before ANYTHING else gets done to the images.

Re:so where's the color photos from JPL?

[Buran]

Stand-up and roll-off is expected to take as long as a week, actually. But we'll see a lot of data returned before the rover even moves.

They're ALL black and white

[raygundan]

Even the "color" cameras are black and white. They have nifty color wheels that rotate over them, and the unit takes pictures in succession to get the red, green, blue, IR, and several other shades i'm nor sure of.

Why do they do it this way? With the exception of the relatively new Foveon CCDs, "color" digital still and video cameras work in one of two ways-- 3 CCDs and a prism that splits the colors off to each CCD, or 1 CCD that has a grid of R, G, or B pixels arranged in blocks like this:

RG
GB

Note that this means your true full-color resolution is about 1/4 the advertised value (yes, your 4 megapixel digicam actually has 1MP red, 1MP blue, and 2MP green). Most digicams (except the Foveon CCDs and 3CCD video cameras) work this way, and use neighboring values to calculate the full RGB value at each pixel.

Using a single CCD and color filters gets you the accuracy of a 3CCD camera minus the weight and power consumption of two extra CCDs and a prism. It has the disadvantage of not being so good for fast action shots in color. Fortunately, those rocks are sitting pretty still. If something fast should happen, and the camera happens to catch it, we will still have a nice sharp B&W image of it.

Re:I don't see stereo images...

[raygundan]

You're right, you're just not looking hard enough. Or maybe you went to the nasa link, where they're not so well arranged. The little images ARE the ones that were assembled into a panorama. The link to the guy's site has them all organized into stereo pairs (I assume they just used all left or all right to make the pan).

The pairs are arranged like this:

(Right Cam) (Left Cam) (Right Cam) (red/blue)

You can cross your eyes and look at the first two, or use cardboard tubes and look at the second two, or use red/blue glasses and look at the fourth.