First Stereograms of Mars from Spirit 402
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!"
I just don't get it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I just don't get it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:These pictures (Score:4, Informative)
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
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.
Maestro (Score:2)
Re:Maestro (Score:3, Informative)
Check back on their website - they estimate about one update per week.
Extremely cool (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Extremely cool (Score:2)
I always thought the letting-your-eyes-relax (vergence movement) so that the two images overlap binocularly (a la random dot stereograms) WAS the cross-eyed approach. But you seem to describe it as the "parallel approach" Can you elaborate?
Re:Extremely cool (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Extremely cool (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Extremely cool (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Extremely cool (Score:2)
I'm going to gauchely reply to myself and say you must be right....doing the magic eye style reconvergence thing looks MUCH better on the second and third images (makes more optical "sense") -- the ones the page descibes as intended for "parallel approach" viewing---than on the first two, which the page describes as intended for "cross-eyed approach" viewing. I must have had my L/R info switched. And, on introspection, it makes sense that magic eye approach involves refocusing past the plane of the pictu
Re:Extremely cool (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Extremely cool (Score:3, Insightful)
I prefer the parallel viewing method. However that method has an built in weakness. Images can only have a separation of about 50-60mm. Wider than that, and the eyes have to look beyond parallel. The cross eyed version does not have this weakness.
Knowing how and being physically able not the same (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Try taking your glasses/lenses off (Score:3, Interesting)
Damn it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Damn it (Score:2)
-Alex
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Mars: Reach out and touch it. (Score:5, Funny)
You're in management, right?
One way is easy. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Mars: Reach out and touch it. (Score:2)
Making sure that someone can get there, without being irradiated, with enough food to last the round trip (or one way, and send the return trip food ahea
Well... (Score:2)
We mock what we don't understand.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Insightful)
We mock what we don't understand.
Imagine if Beagle 2 was a manned mission. We'd sure as hell at least know what happened. And the majority of failed mars missions have failed because there was something wrong that couldn't be fixed by remote. If there was someone on hand to reach over and tweak the long-range antenna, I'm positive the percantage of successful missions would be much higher.
Re:Well... (Score:3, Funny)
A maned mission? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Let's Go to Mars!!! (Score:5, Interesting)
But still people did it. They explored. Because they know the long term payoff was there. And that there were willing souls ready to go now... and that the rewards and the victory go to the strong and the brave. The timid sit back and let others collect.
Rome faltered when it got soft. It became brittle. The people were interested in bloody spectacles... infighting and political intrigue took over in the Senate. Then Barbarians with a different religion attacked -- Of course Rome could always defeat them -- but again and again they attacked until finally the capital fell.
Just a random historical bit of trivia to throw at the end of my rant... It wasn't supposed mean anything...or maybe it was. Look, all I know is that someone from our generation needs to start inspiring people. Let's go to Mars and stop worrying so much, OK? Humanity NEEDS this and people are tougher than you think.
Re:Let's Go to Mars!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, you aren't going to be sending PhD's, but just like fighter pilots, you keep the best at home to train and direct, and set the second best to do the work (and the dying).
Of course you have to provide a reasonable chance for survival, I don't think you'd get many volunteers for a strict suicide mission, but even if it was a
Re:Mars: Reach out and touch it. (Score:2, Insightful)
However, the basic need, atmosphere was avaliable.
When you are on the way to Mars in a Titanium Can and it's 3-6 months away, atmosphere isn't avaliable.
Illnesses can crop up on the way to Mars too.
But the early trips to the New World and around the world had high rates of death, but there is a very high risk in going to Mars too.
Look how many Mars probe missions failed, in 2003-04 the world is has had 2 of 3 fail and if Opportunity works, then we are batting
Re:Mars: Reach out and touch it. (Score:3, Funny)
Nice idea, Bruce Dern. However, all attempts so far to create a self-contained and self-sustaining biosphere have failed.
You think the ISS is expensive, try building the vehicle large enough for a biosphere and having it survive the acceleration needed to get to Mars within a decade...
Other than that, I agree that a manned flight would have a higher success rate than a robotic one due to real-time correctional ability. However, the initial steps of maintaining the human cargo have yet to be addressed
Re:Mars: Reach out and touch it. (Score:3, Informative)
For those that don't know [shipofdreams.net] what he is talking about. [imdb.com]
Great movie. Except the syrupy Joan Baez tunes.
Manned Missions to Mars in 2006! (Score:5, Insightful)
Ask yourself this question... the people who go on Fear Factor... the people who fly solo across Antarctica... the people who sail across the Pacific alone, with no radio... I bet most of them are in pretty great shape. I bet you could get 1000 of them to volunteer for a manned Mars mission in 2006 in a heartbeat. I bet out of that 1000 -- these are people who climb mountains and run triathalons, remember -- at least 50 or 100 of the candidates would be able to pass a training program and be "able" to fly to Mars. Especially if we build our ships right -- let the machines and the computers do most the work and train these people to do what they already get off on doing: surviving.
When they're there -- they can take pictures of the rocks the mission wants, take the soil samples of the areas the mission asks... things space agencies spend billions for each primitive 100 kg. robot to do one time... Why not instead send out tens of manned missions? Do it right. And sure, we might lose 1 trip out of 3. More at first. I bet ANY of these people would be MORE than willing to go... AND you'd be saving money!!! Tons of money. The first crew that arrived successfully... think of it. Think of the presige. The honor of having your name go down as that man or woman in history? And think of all the experiments they we perform with PEOPLE there... Just imagine! And if they were to arrive home... what it could do for the world...
Does this sound brutal? To me it feels visionary -- it makes just so much common sense; why don't people ever spell it out like this? Let people freely decide if they are willing to take that risk. Here we are, legalizing assisted suicide across the Western world but we don't have the balls to let adventurers sign up for one of the last ULTIMATE adventures???
Re:Manned Missions to Mars in 2006! (Score:3, Insightful)
Because if they did make it, you'd not have scientists or engineers on Mars, which is what you want, not the average Fear Factor contestant.
I don't think a lack of willingness of the astronauts is the problem here. The problem is that spacetravel should not be a crapshoot.
Sailing across the world hundreds of years ago wasn't. You stocked up on vegetables and press
Re:Manned Missions to Mars in 2006! (Score:3, Insightful)
Sailing across the world hundreds of years ago wasn't.
Fun quotes about Magellan's circumnavigations from Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
"One ship, the Santiago,was sent down the coast on a scouting expedition, but it was wrecked on the return trip. Only two sailors returned, overland, to inform Magellan of what had happened."
"Eight crewmen died as they faced 1500 warriors. The crew were forced to leave Magellan to die, surrounded by warriors, in the surf."
"Twenty c
Damn, and I had my little 3d glasses RIGHT here... (Score:2)
Other 3-D sets (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Other 3-D sets (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Other 3-D sets (Score:2)
SO which one of us was REALLY first?
Re:so where's the color photos from JPL? (Score:5, Informative)
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].
Re:so where's the color photos from JPL? (Score:3, Informative)
Wow, just wow (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Wow, just wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Since when has that mattered on
Neat (Score:2)
But these pictures are just cool looking.
anaglyph (Score:2, Informative)
PNGs are good for this sort of thing.
I believe JPEG also has a RGB mode which will eliminate ghosting.
Re:anaglyph (Score:2)
Maybe because he's posting many dozens of images on a single page on a slashdotted server?
Re:anaglyph (Score:2)
Plus if he can handle this, PNGs shouldn't be a problem.
Stereo images (Score:5, Informative)
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:Stereo images (Score:2)
Re:Stereo images (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Stereo images (Score:3, Informative)
Geek Pr0n (Score:5, Funny)
I'll ask (Score:2)
Re:I'll ask (Score:2)
You can get this DVD [amazon.com] about the dark side of technology (or really bright, depending on how you think of it.)
I, for one, like the Mars technology better.
Re:I'll ask (Score:4, Informative)
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:I'll ask (Score:3, Funny)
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.
I just used a Tostitos bag and a coat hanger.
Please don't mod me as funny...
Re:I'll ask (Score:2)
As luck would have it, I saw Spy Kids 3D yesterday. I knew there had to be a reason why I subjected myself to that. And now I know: free 3D glasses for viewing images from Mars!
i.e. ask your local cinema. They probably have a whole box of the things just lying around in a store room.
In a day and age like this... (Score:4, Insightful)
Black and forking White?!?! (Score:2)
Re:Black and forking White?!?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Black and forking White?!?! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Black and forking White?!?! (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyone know the stereo separation on these? (Score:2)
Re:Anyone know the stereo separation on these? (Score:3, Informative)
The REAL First Stereo Images (Score:2)
Posted 1-28 gmt [slashdot.org]
as did someone else shortly after (who put together a website)
posted 4-46 [slashdot.org]
sad thing is that the guy that made the website did a better job of the one that hit the headlines.
The poster is getting credit for First stereogram pairs when someone else got their first.( I made the first one posted on slashdot) and the other guy made more images, a website and an article first but got rejected...
nick....
3-D pairs from Viking/Pathfinder's landing site (Score:3, Informative)
A FAKE?!?!? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:A FAKE?!?!? (Score:2)
Re:A FAKE?!?!? (Score:3, Funny)
What?
Anaglyphs? (Score:4, Funny)
Isn't that what they call tatoos on your...
Almost every picture from Spirit is a pair (Score:4, Interesting)
Note that the cameras are about a foot apart in most cases, about 5 times the spacing between your eyes, so the 3D is exaggerated by the same amount (alternatively, you can think that it makes the world look 5 times as small.) It's amazing what the third dimension gives you.
Sadly, the amount of JPEG compression on these early images adds a huge amount of noise, that isn't apparent in the single images but makes the stereo pair look very noisy indeed. One would hope that once the high-gain antenna is configured, they can start sending far less compressed images.
The other sad thing is that I lost the URL of the raw images page
thad
Re:Almost every picture from Spirit is a pair (Score:3, Informative)
What's most interesting to me is ... (Score:3, Interesting)
I prefer the parallel images to the cross-eyed ones. Crossing your eyes just hurts, but relaxing them and focusing them offscreen doesn't at all, you can do it forever practically if you can get a lock on the right amount to relax.
Stereo Analglyphs? (Score:2)
Surely I can't be the only person who thought that when reading the story?
A good way to view the side by side images (Score:5, Funny)
When your wife/GF comes in asks what the hell you are doing- tell her you are looking for martians on the Intra-Web. Watch her leave the room- quickly.
Excellent (Score:3, Insightful)
I think I'll be taking these goggles to the bedroom tonight!
Re:A good way to view the side by side images (Score:5, Funny)
But what do I do if they BOTH walk in? ;)
Cross eyed vs. parallel stereo vision? (Score:2)
Re:Cross eyed vs. parallel stereo vision? (Score:5, Informative)
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:Cross eyed vs. parallel stereo vision? (Score:2)
For the parallel ones, you use your left eye to look at the picture on the left and your right eye to look at the picture on the right. Since normally, both eyes look at the same place, you need to let your eyes drift apart.
For the crosseyed ones, you use your left eye to look at the picture on the right and your right eye to look at the picture on the left. I.e., you cross your eyes slightly.
oh joy! (Score:2)
Forgive me if I wait for the best or some interesting ones before I bother to look.
Why does this seem familiar? (Score:3, Informative)
Oh, by the way, here's the link I found that page at [nasa.gov]. Just leave the Karma on the dresser.
Build your own stereoscope to view these (Score:4, Informative)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
am i the only one... (Score:2)
Tips For Viewing (Score:2, Informative)
Bounce Impacts? (Score:3, Interesting)
Conspiracy Theory (Score:2, Funny)
NASA vs Slashdot (Score:5, Funny)
Quicktime VR Composite (Score:5, Informative)
I love it... (Score:4, Funny)
I just hope we don't find any life on mars with this mission or we'll all be looking for tin foil to wrap around our heads.
I don't see stereo images... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I don't see stereo images... (Score:3, Informative)
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,
Here is the GOOD INFO on Spirit Rover and Mars (Score:5, Informative)
2004 Mars Exploration Rover Mission History and Highlights:
http://axonchisel.net/etc/space/mars-exp-rover-hi
Nav Cam (Score:3, Informative)
Gusev Crater a poor choice (Score:3, Insightful)
Any new pictures of the Martian landscape are very cool, but I have to question the choice of the landing site. Gusev Crater may be very interesting in a macro sense, it probably contains lacustrine sediments. But are these sediments accessable to the rover which has landed in the middle of a featureless plain? I doubt it. It is more likely that it will just sample the ubiquitous dust and rock ejecta, again. There may be no significant exposures of the stratigraphic section nearby. When will one of these missions truely explore the fantastic landscape revealed from orbit?
Re:red and green (Score:2)
The cross-eyed method is the best in this situation, IMHO.
-Alex
Red Blue and Pfizer (Score:5, Funny)
My stereo glasses came from inside a science magazine attached to a Pfizer ad about microbes to show the micrographs in 3D.
As an office joke I pasted the glasses which featured the Pfizer logo promenantly to my own ad...
NEW VIRTUAL VIAGRA!
Paint left side of penis blue, paint right side of penis red.
Penis Now Appears Erect!
Re:Red Blue and Pfizer (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The Gray Planet (Score:3, Informative)
Because they aren't using their color cam yet.
They're ALL black and white (Score:3, Informative)
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 t