James Cameron To Develop 3-D Camera For Mars Rover 143
Hugh Pickens writes "Computerworld reports that movie director James Cameron, of Avatar and Titanic fame, is working with Malin Space Science Systems Inc. to build an updated 3-D camera that will be installed on the Mars Science Laboratory rover Curiosity if completed in time, to be the machine's 'science-imaging workhorse,' says Michael Malin, who is working on the camera team. Malin delivered two cameras to be installed on the rover's main mast; however NASA has provided Malin with funding to work with Cameron to build alternatives to these two cameras. 'The fixed focal length [cameras] we just delivered will do almost all of the science we originally proposed. But they cannot provide a wide field of view with comparable eye stereo,' he says. 'With the zoom [cameras], we'll be able to take cinematic video sequences in 3-D on the surface of Mars.'"
Yes, but what about the story? (Score:2, Funny)
What's the narrative you're using?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Talking of Jobs, it seems James Cameron is joining that elite club (the one that Richard Branson used to belong to) where he's tinkering with everything and every time he farts it's considered newsworthy.
It worked for the Moon and it will work again! (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Jessica Alba?
Re: (Score:2)
Pocahonthas [failblog.org], of course.
Oh. I mean Dances With Wolves.
Re:Yes, but what about the story? Seriously (Score:2, Interesting)
Jim Cameron optioned Kim Stanley Robinson's trilogy "RED MARS", "BLUE MARS", and "GREEN MARS" many years ago. Everyone kind of thought Jim might have given the project up. This probably means it is now full-on after the Pandora sequels.
Placing better 3D cameras on Rover "Curiosity" provides Jim's production company with early access to footage that can be better matched to in-studio green screen sets, especially because the height of the deployed rover camera mast is approximately the average height of
Any Takers? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm taking bets on how long it takes NASA to discover blue aliens on Mars.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
We'll paint it blue so as to blend in.
I'm ready for this mission (Score:2)
But, if you see another Rover. Wake me up before I fall in love with it.
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
For the publicity. NASA is in serious need of some.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
I thought that was strange too. They mention his two shittiest films, but neglect his two best films.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They are the two most recent films he's done. One of them came out mere months ago - hell, it's probably still in theaters in some locations - and got a lot of attention in the press. Both films outsold Aliens and Terminator by a fair margin. In fact, Avatar and Titanic hold the #1 and #2 spots on the list of highest-grossing movies ever created.
And just to give a value-added anecdote, I wasn't aware he was the director of Aliens (which I've never seen) or the Terminator films. The purpose of naming a coupl
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Aliens (which I've never seen)
Get. Out. Of. My. Slashdot.. Now!
Re:Why? (Score:4, Insightful)
Not really that bizarre, Avatar had all that 3D stuff and for Titanic he got underwater footage of the actual ship deep underwater which are both more related to the subject than Aliens or Terminator.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure that the fact that they're more recent and more commercially successful (and therefore more likely to grab the proles' attention for 5 minutes) had absolutely nothing to do with it. At all. Not even a little bit, round the edges.
Re: (Score:2)
How could anything possibly be more related to that subject than Aliens?
Terminator might be more closely related, given that it's about robots, and it's robots that will will be going to Mars.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Avatar is relevant due to the subject (3D).
Also, consider:
Avatar -- worldwide box office, $2.7 billion (#1 all time)
Titanic -- worldwide box office, $1.8 billion (#2 all time)
Aliens -- worldwide box office, $131 million
The Terminator -- worldwide box office, $78 million
There might be a reason that the latter two aren
Re: (Score:2)
No, and I've never seen worldwide inflation-adjusted box office numbers or rankings.
The best I can find is domestic box office adjusted for ticket-price inflation, where, Avatar is #12 and Titanic #6 of all time, and neither Aliens nor Terminator rate anywhere of interest (the only film from either franchise that makes the top 100 is Terminator 2 -- at #96.)
Heck, Aliens was #7 and Terminator #21 in domestic box office -- each among movies released i
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
For the publicity. NASA is in serious need of some.
Yeah, remember that one time in the 90s they shot a senator into space [space-tourism.ws]? It was to "study the effects of space on the elderly". They seriously said that. In public. And reporters played along with it like it was serious research.
That was the day NASA lost my support.
Re: (Score:1)
He was trying to keep up with the Garns.
--
That year Fritz Hollings 76 was reelected junior Senator from South Carolina, John Glenn 77 orbited the planet, and Thomas Jefferson 200 became a father.
Re: (Score:2)
For the publicity. NASA is in serious need of some.
So they picked the guy that got famous making a disaster film like Titanic? Not only that but he managed to make a mockery of it. (It was more about Americans fucking in a car on a boat and a loopy old women that throw away fictional priceless jewels than the Titanic). Sure he's currently famous for a sci-fi film that features 3D but they should still pick their bedfellows based on more than the current Hollywood Marketing. Real science has to have real substance, not over the top special effects. I wonder
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
he knows absolutely NOTHING about how to DESIGN them
Are you sure about this? I can't contradict you, but when you've done as many movies under as many conditions as JC has, you probably have had to do some modifications to cameras that might actually make you an expert in the hardware.
If you ever saw the making of The Abyss, they did some pretty crazy stuff, and I'll bet he had a hand in modifying the cameras to do what he wanted.
Halo effect (Score:5, Funny)
I heard he grinds the lenses himself. By hand. He also wrote an optimized implementation of MLT over dinner one night. In perl.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The camera lenses aren't polished by his hands, but by his ass, as he squeezes the glass between his large hairy buns while shouting "I am the king of the world!"
Re: (Score:2)
In perl.
What? DRM [wikipedia.org]? In my NASA?
Re: (Score:2)
Easy to do in Perl.
Try it in Java!
Re: (Score:2)
Over dinner? The restaurant better have plenty of napkins...
In perl it's only one line. But to be fair, in perl, anything is only one line.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, he's just a really rich idiot right? What does he actually know?
Re: (Score:2)
Difficult to tell where your sarcasm is aimed (at NASA/Cameron or at the person being sarky to him) but rich doesn't necessarily imply smart, and smart certainly doesn't imply smart at everything.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, he will be asked to create content as well?
Hopefully, that's nothing more than Plan B at NASA, though...
Re:Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know the level of detail that he was involved in, but Cameron did have a hand [wikipedia.org] in developing the camera and he's used it in several of his movies (including Avatar).
How much actual technical help was he? No idea, but it is called the Pace-Cameron Fusion Camera System. It must be pretty good as well considering both the amazing job it did for Avatar and the fact that the technology is going to be used in other films [wikipedia.org] as well.
And, as others mentioned, dropping his name is good for publicity and is probably designed to give the public something to look forward to from the next rover.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh god, they're making another Resident Evil movie?
Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)
Well, if you actually read the Wikipedia article you link to - you'll find he was originally trained as an electrical engineer. So I'd say he may have contributed quite a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation needed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cameron#Background [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
NASA is just name-dropping. NASA has been a PR-disaster-barely-avoided for its entire history. It used to be a military ICBM research project disguised as Flash Gordon, but the 21st century needs something new.... like Total Recall disguised as WALL-E's 3D adventure in space.
Does the preceding sentence make no sense to you? It'll make lots of sense to
Re: (Score:2)
It'll make lots of sense to your grandchildren when they're serfs mining helium3 on the moon.
For fuck's sake, I want to be a serf mining helium3 on the moon. Now you're saying my grandchildren will get to do that? Fuck that. Now they're never going to inherit my valuable antique Pentium 4.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)
Maybe they are employing him in a high level role. After all, he probably knows who is the best at this kinds of stuff. Also, I believe he worked closely with the optical engineers on the camera equipment for Avatar.
While the cynic in me initially believed this was a pure PR move, I actually think he may be a good choice for something like this.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:5, Interesting)
Stereoscopic imaging is pretty simple technology...why would you employ a film director, rather than an optical engineer to do it?
Having worked on several stereo films (including Avatar) I can tell you that it isn't simple at all. Building something that takes stereo photos and developing an automated machine that can take effective photos with proper interocular and all that jazz are two very different things. You can hand a camera to an experienced photographer and then to your sister and get two VERY different photos. With your sister, you'd be lucky if she didn't chop off the head. With the photographer, besides setting all the settings correctly, he'd also find the most effective angle/lighting to take the photo at.
It's also worth mentioning that Jim has had a lot of experience not only behind the camera, but also with using machines to capture imagery in very hostile enviornments. (see Ghosts of the Abyss and Aliens of the Deep.)
Really it makes perfect sense why they'd want his input, it just helps to know more about who he is and how simple stereo photograph aint. ;)
Re: (Score:1)
But the Slashdot crowd would like some technical examples of how an expert photographer improves the results.
Re:Why? (Score:4, Informative)
I think if the Slashdot crowd really wanted technical examples, they'd ask questions instead of making statements. ;)
Photography is a strong blend of art and science. The expert photographer would understand that he is capturing a two dimensional image of a three dimensional object. He'd make sure the lighting is such that it gives proper cues to the brain about what its three dimensional form is. He'd attempt to capture the subject at the right angle that its silohuette reads, even making choices about what's behind it. He'd also compose the shot to land your eye onto the right part of the image. He'd also do things like make sure there isn't a bright light-source behind the subject preventing the camera from exposing them properly. This is only a small portion of what a professional photographer would do.
Stereo photography is all that and then it's compounded by having a second camera in the mix. On Avatar a number of things had to be taken into consideration. Take an environment like the Ops Center. You've got a lot of shiny hard edged things, many right up near the camera, and a good deal of overlap. Shiny, in particular, is a problem. With the seperation between the cameras the specularity or reflectivity of the metal can cause one eye to see something drastically different from the other. Sometimes that's fixed by a guy on the set, sometimes it's fixed by re-composing the shot. How far apart should the cameras be? That depends on what you want to show the audience. It's not as simple as "Make it the width of a human!" because our eyes don't zoom. When you zoom in the seperation is exaggerated so you have to adjust the width. When you're transitioning from one shot to another you have to be mindful of how much you're asking the audience to change their focus. Etc etc etc.
What it all boils down to is that there is no simple set of rules to shoot streographically. This worries me as I imagine the whole reason they'd do this is to make the stereo functions on the machine as automatic as possible. They only way they're going to make something usable a suitable percent of the time is to have a good idea of the sort of scenarios it would encounter and how it could best deal with them. That's where having somebody who's been behind the lens of a stereo camera for many many hours comes in handy. And that is why somebody like Jim would be ideal to have on hand.
Re: (Score:2)
I think if the Slashdot crowd really wanted technical examples, they'd ask questions instead of making statements. ;)
Ha! That's a good one. What are you going to ask of us next? That we actually RTFA? *snicker* ... You're a clever one....
Re: (Score:2)
With your sister, you'd be lucky if she didn't chop off the head.
As long as YOUR sister gets her body in the bathroom mirror, I'm happy.
Re:Why? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
For the same reason you don't hire an optical engineer for advice on scene composition; you hire a critically acclaimed photographer.
Anyone can take 3D photos. But you still need a good photographer to bring out the best of a scene.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone can take 3D photos. But you still need a good photographer to bring out the best of a scene.
Well, yes, but I would assume NASA are interested in scientific imaging, not aesthetics or composition.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously that is their main priority.
Re: (Score:2)
because he just so happens to be an optical engineer with an extra degree in physics. and he's been to space 14 times.
er...no.
because it's publicity. and he's a huge obama supporter (no, really).
Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, Cameron did indeed study physics, and did a lot of engineering. As others have mentioned, he's most likely one of the best-connected people to the community of optical engineers who work on 3D images. He's already proven that he can co-design a pretty effective 3D camera.
And it's not like NASA is putting him in charge of anything. He's being brought in as an adviser, probably on a pretty high level, and as far as I can tell, pro bono. I think that's pretty cool. I have no doubt that he will contribute two or three useful ideas based on his extensive experience. This also serves to promote the narrative of Cameron the technical wizard: Gear he helped design even went to Mars! It makes a great feel-good talking point for him when he's doing the interview circuit for his next movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Joss Whedon was too busy.
Re: (Score:2)
Good enough for the brain-dead movie-going public today, but not good enough for the future?
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
You simply weren't paying attention. Quite a lot of the displays seen in the command center, and in the linking lab, were in 3D. You could see parallax shift in the contents of the display as the camera panned past them. I also liked the way the tech was able to "swipe" gesture the contents of his display onto a portable "pad" display, the contents of which were also in 3D. It was pretty neat. Why all the hate for what was a very well executed science fiction film? Was it because it was successful? Can geek
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Its not entirely uncommon for the crew on films that do things that haven't been done a lot in film to actually develop new techniques in the process, so its not entirely unlikely t
Oracle of Bacon Says... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Depth Perception (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Afaik, NASA is required to use metric on all new stuff, anyway. Thus, this particular error is not likely to be made again.
Also, ESA is not involved, which means that even if NASA is still using imperial on new things, it should not be a problem per se.
No... he's promoting it. (Score:2)
Which now we must ask, why is a shlock film maker being allowed input into critical scientific exploration? Please NASA get off the fanboi wagon.
Re: (Score:2)
Correction He's promoting HIS view of space...
my apologies.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a mechanical error. The mechanics are electrochemical, but still...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
He is extremely well read on physics. He did develop a lot of the technology himself.
Sigh... (Score:3, Insightful)
Malin used to work at Pixar. He's the absolute right person to do this. He doesn't really need Cameron, just give him the assignment.
What bothers me about this, though, is that this science project has to pander to the public with eye-candy. Because we can't sell them on the science. I think this says something about our national lack of education, and something about the public having become a massively parallel knee-jerk driven by the lies fed to them daily on Fox TV and the trash TV that is more important to them than mankind's future.
Bruce
Re:Sigh... (Score:5, Insightful)
What bothers me about this, though, is that this science project has to pander to the public with eye-candy. Because we can't sell them on the science. I think this says something about our national lack of education, and something about the public having become a massively parallel knee-jerk driven by the lies fed to them daily on Fox TV and the trash TV that is more important to them than mankind's future.
No Bruce its the same all around the world. I don't think it is education as such. I am sure there are plenty of highly educated managers who would not care about the science and perhaps be inspired by a good picture in passing.
Immersion is a good way of catching people's attention. Cameron did that with Avatar and found new viewers for a simple action+SF story. Maybe he can do the same with Mars. Maybe someone can sell monitors just for viewing the latest from Mars in 3D. I don't think data on air temperature or organics in the soil will ever do it for the majority.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Bruce has a point. I also question the marketing ploy behind this. I can't quite see what NASA is getting out of this, and I can more easily see how an industry might benefit in the marketing of the 3D gadgetry. I just wish this gadget would disappear just like its previous incarnation and odorama and I resent seeing science getting along with such gimmicks.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't wait to see what they'll come up with for "wide field of view with comparable eye stereo", it appears to be really non-trivial thing to do (accidentally, a thing I was wondering about a bit - doing it properly probably requires quite insane optical system)
At the least, with "proper" zooming, we might finally have the ultimate geeky "romantic" photo; with stunning view of Mars moons.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What bothers me is why a 3D camera? That gimmick will be gone soon ... particularly if active stereo hangs around. And what really is the value add?
Why not go with LiDAR? Datasets will be smaller and far more accurate with lots of additional data dimensions. Point clouds are fabulous to work with.
Re: (Score:1)
Eye candy and science are not exclusive (Score:2)
There's nothing wrong with trying to make science look good. Great pictures/movies inspire people; I'd rather they be inspired by Hubble shots or Mars rover films than by Australian Roman torture snuff movies.
What we get back from current probes is surprisingly bland. I think it would go a long way towards making Mars real in the mind of people to have high-def moving pictures beamed back. Currently while we have very stunning photos, it's all very static. We have no feel of what the materials are like. Thi
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't sell the public on science it's because you're doing it wrong. John Kennedy built his political career tightly integrated with project mercury.
Smokin'! (Score:2)
No need for two cameras (Score:5, Funny)
This will satisfy the burning need for three dimensional movies of stationary martian rocks.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Hold on. Has Mars always been blue or am I missing something?
Re: (Score:2)
that sounds like an awesome screensaver
You normally wear 3D goggles while using your computer or just walking around the house?
It's obvious why NASA needs him (Score:5, Funny)
Someone contact NASA... (Score:3, Funny)
...and make sure that they steal it rather than pay for it. That way, it will work with their hardware.
Why (Score:1, Insightful)
I strongly suspect that when they say "James Cameron" they mean "a team of optics engineers who worked on Avatar which Cameron nominally leads."
Re: (Score:1)
Does anyone bother to read the nice words? (Score:5, Insightful)
Several people got modded up for questioning why Cameron was "hired" or "designing" the rig. He's not been hired and no one said he's designing anything. He's promoting the idea with NASA to help get people more excited about space. The Mars rover shots did more to get people excited about space than anything since the Moon landing. He's also going to be advising the team but that's legitimate given how much experience he has with 3D camera rigs, it goes back to Terminator 3D, I worked on it and he does know the subject. He also knows the best people in the field for helping them design the rig and software so he can make contacts for them. It's a growing field but 10 years ago the experts were on a very short list. I worked on several 3D productions and you always used to see a lot of the same faces. He's offering free help and he's better informed than most people here seem to give him credit for. Avatar has the best 3D ever and his pushing to make it the best was the reason why. Focusing strictly on hard science is a great way to drive people away. Also 3D images have technical value. Ever try to drive a car with one eye closed? In the future when rovers travel faster and further stereo vision systems will become more important. Now is a good time to develop the technology. Good on Jim for diving in. NASA needs all the help it can get if they are to have any hope of hanging onto their budget as money tightens up.
Re:Does anyone bother to read the nice words? (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides this, Cameron has already worked with scientists. Between Titanic and Avatar he got involved in other deep sea filming projects. He's been with oceanographers and worked with remotely operated vehicles. Kind of like a rover on Mars.
The way he makes films uses 'pre-visualization', where virtual environments are built before the film is shot, allowing many problems to be solved before being on the set. This is what they do when planning spacecraft operations. This is why there are all those flyby simulations that they show before the actual data comes back. In addition, the current Mars rover planning uses a virtual environment for generating path planning before the commands are sent to the real rover. Just like pre-viz in movies.
I would say that Cameron is a real asset for NASA. It's not like he is inserting himself where he is not wanted. I think he can make a positive contribution.
Re: (Score:1)
Ever try to drive a car with one eye closed?
Not personally, but I hear it's a surprisingly popular way to get home from the bar. Something about 2 lines being easier to stay between than 4...
Re: (Score:2)
Ever try to drive a car with one eye closed?
It's pretty easy when you're used to playing driving games, to the best of my knowledge none of them have ever been in 3D, although I'd very much like 'em to be because yes, it's easier to drive with depth cues. But frankly, once you know about what size different cars are (and your brain can build a pretty amazing database of this kind of stuff and make a comparison instantly) then it's pretty easy to see how far you are from other cues, including their size, and parallax shift as compared to other vehicle
Negative (Score:5, Informative)
James Cameron was born in Kapuskasing, Ontario, Canada, on August 16, 1954. He moved to the USA in 1971. The son of an engineer, he majored in physics at California State University.
So yeah, I think he can do trigonometry. He might actually be smarter than you. Give the guy a break.
Nasa slipping (Score:2)
Was a time when it was NASA providing the tech to the film director, like when they traded a high tech lens capable of shooting in very low light to Stanley Kubrick in exchange for him helping fake the moon landing.
Dark Side of the Moon [www.cbc.ca]
Obama (Score:1)
waste of time (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's not about that. Maybe the idea is to develop more usable human interfaces for remote control of the rovers on Mars. An immersive 3D environment for remote operators (a kind of avatar, if you will) would be a good way to improve the science being done, at least until we can get real people to Mars.
ASC has 3d cameras (Score:2)
Advanced scientific concepts has 3d cameras.
http://www.advancedscientificconcepts.com/ [advancedsc...ncepts.com]
Read the press release...NASA is mentioned.
Seeing as NASA's been under a tight budget... (Score:1)
What is the bandwidth like anyways and will this f (Score:2)
What is the bandwidth like anyways and will this fit in it?
Of course he is... (Score:2)
That's why it's cool to be James Cameron! After making the "Terminator" movies, something resembling that same killer robot got to take over and destroy California. After making "Titanic", he just automatically gets to climb abort the submarine from "The Abyss" and travel down to the real Titanic.
So of course Cameron is going into space. Now it's just his cool 3D camera, maybe, but if he makes a sequel to "Avatar", he automatically gets to really go into space.