Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Smooth, High Definition Video of Curiosity's Landing On Mars

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the pretty-pictures dept.

Mars 78

_0x783czar writes "Filmmaker Brad Canning has released a hi-def video of Curiosity's landing. This video was captured in low res, and then extrapolated and re-rendered by Canning to produce some of the most stunning imagery ever captured on an alien world. It took Canning over a month to complete the process. He used motion tracking to add sound effects which in turn give you the sensation of the ride of your life."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Enhance! (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338811)

clearly Enhance truly does exist... or you could just watch the Official Nasa HD version..hmm http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/hd/

Re:Enhance! (1)

MrNaz (730548) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339887)

At the end it says "Produced by Bard Canning". Brad or Bard? I presume he's less likely to mistype his name than the Slashdot editors.

Re:Enhance! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41340621)

His name is Bard, not Brad. Here is the original posting on reddit, confirming it:

http://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/ztkk0/i_spent_four_weeks_working_framebyframe_to/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Re:Enhance! (1)

Black LED (1957016) | more than 2 years ago | (#41340797)

That Bart Channing guy did a great job on the video.

Re:Enhance! (1)

anomaly256 (1243020) | more than 2 years ago | (#41340577)

Sir, you and I have very different interpretations of the meaning of 'enhance'. I found that video to be horrible. The frame interpolation was completely jarring enlarging an image and adding smoothing does not make it 'Ultra HD'. I'd say they /destroyed/ the video, not enhanced it.

Uh... (3, Interesting)

Joehonkie (665142) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338861)

Are the bizarre color shifts and weird smoothing/warping for a few frames in some places a result of the extrapolation process?

Re:Uh... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338877)

Yep.

Re:Uh... (3, Informative)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339031)

The original footage was 4fps and not exactly 1080p, so yes, and it's to be expected. I imagine with a lot more work you could eliminate most of it, but that would probably require adjusting every frame by hand (which would be extremely laborious). And by that point the end result will be even more made-up than the current result.

Re:Uh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41340825)

"The original footage was 4fps and not exactly 1080p"

No, but it was 1600x1200, which makes it more than 1920x1080 in one dimension, less in the other.

Re:Uh... (1)

kdogg73 (771674) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339989)

I would say yes, it's the modern production fix of dropped frames, like interpolating photography when the data's not really there to increase the size. Other stuff is probably from a camera dynamically trying to balance light and color. Nonetheless, truly an awesome video.

eh.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338867)

Looks weird.

CSI... (2)

otaku244 (1804244) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338871)

ENHANCE! There's a reflection of an alien shadow off that rock.

Re:CSI... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339331)

CSI? Wrong site, wrong show! "There's a reflection of an alien shadow off that rock" is a line from STNG, the one where Geordi turns into some sort of weird invisible alien (it's Geordi's line word for word IIRC).

Re:STNG... (1)

MRe_nl (306212) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339527)

STNG? Wrong site, wrong show! BLADERUNNER!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkcU0gwZUdg [youtube.com]
(It's Deckard's line word for word if you leave out the Esper coordinates). ; ).

Re:CSI... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41349159)

You mean the one where they extrapolated some blobish shape from the shadows? We can practically do that now, and without whatever more advanced, possibly 3D, recording methods they have in ST:TNG. If anything, the enhancement in that episode was more realistic that what has shown up in some crime dramas. The currently unrealistic part, like much of sci-fi, was that it could be done mostly automated with a very simple voice user interface and no tweaking.

Re:CSI... (2)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339659)

Nah. That's just the shadow of the craft services van.

First Post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338873)

Woot first post.
But seriously Very Cool. I just regret that they played with the sound.

Re:First Post (2)

isorox (205688) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338983)

Woot first post.

It really wasn't. Perhaps you were posting from Mars?

versions (5, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338887)

The remastered version certainly is better quality, but I'll wait for the limited edition director's cut of Episode I: Giant Nuclear-Powered Laser Robot Invades Mars. It's supposed to be a rock-solid performance with plenty of driving action scenes.

Re:versions (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338933)

The remastered version certainly is better quality, but I'll wait for the limited edition director's cut of Episode I: Giant Nuclear-Powered Laser Robot Invades Mars. It's supposed to be a rock-solid performance with plenty of driving action scenes.

They're holding off on the release of that since it appears you can spot the Prophet Mohammed in the background.

He looks like this "."

Re:versions (1)

synapse7 (1075571) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338955)

You'll be disappointed by how terrible it will look at 60fps.

Re:versions (1)

Nrrqshrr (1879148) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338977)

I advise you to watch this one too. We will soon have debates about who shot first, Curiosity or GIGA ALIEN 9K

Re:versions (1)

isorox (205688) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338995)

The remastered version certainly is better quality, but I'll wait for the limited edition director's cut of Episode I: Giant Nuclear-Powered Laser Robot Invades Mars. It's supposed to be a rock-solid performance with plenty of driving action scenes.

Remember, Curiosity shot first.

1 month of work? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338947)

Seriously? That's an afternoon of work. He must have used the completly wrong tools.
Motion stabilization and interpolation at this level(lots of artifacts) is really not that much work.

It's a nice video otherwise, but definitely NOT a month of work.

Re:1 month of work? (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339375)

There's no mention to the skill level of the person making this video, except for the fact they hand-did this, if you read the comment for the video.

Re:1 month of work? (2)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339619)

OK, smartass. Go download the original and post your results tomorrow. We'll be waiting.

Re:1 month of work? (1)

drkim (1559875) | more than 2 years ago | (#41342449)

Seriously? That's an afternoon of work.quote>
No. That's 3 seconds of button pushing of work, maybe 2 hours of tracking and render.

Not for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41338949)

I prefer to experience extended 10g deceleration in person.

-- MyLongNickName

Nice Video, But... (4, Informative)

Latentius (2557506) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338981)

I like the video quality enhancements, they really bring out a lot of hidden details. The frame extrapolations, though, give a weird gelatinous effect to the video.

And I could really do without the sound effects, especially the cheesy motor sound effects at the ending.

Re:Nice Video, But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41339185)

Nope, it's just bad interpolation. Considering the linearity of the approach, this could have been much better.(And would have actually taken a month to do)

Re:Nice Video, But... (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339473)

And I could really do without the sound effects, especially the cheesy motor sound effects at the ending.

I know times are tough, but if your computer hardware is entirely lacking volume control then the video player provides a helpful interface to control the volume.

Re:Nice Video, But... (2)

Latentius (2557506) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339535)

Thank you for the passive-aggressive response. However, my comment was directed at the portion of TFS which reads:

To add sound effects which in turn give you the sensation of the ride of your life.

In my opinion, these sound effects do more to cheapen the sensation rather than enhance it.

If you don't like that I happen to have an opinion of my own, surely your internet browser has a helpful interface element known as a scroll bar, which allows you to progress further down the page and pass up the offending opinion.

Re:Nice Video, But... (1)

Namarrgon (105036) | more than 2 years ago | (#41340433)

This looks like a job for Captain Obvious Solution! All you have to do is... oh right, you guys both figured it out already.

No matter, millions still need saving from the evil First World Problems gang! Let's go, Private Pebkac, someone in the city of YouTube hasn't found the Close Tab button yet.

Re:Nice Video, But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41348697)

So... you complain about people complaining about things that are easily ignored instead of just ignoring them?

Re:Nice Video, But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41339661)

Totally agree. At first I thought I was hearing wind from another planet. That was truly epic until I read it was all fake.

Re:Nice Video, But... (1)

david.given (6740) | more than 2 years ago | (#41340407)

I agree, the video's really impressive, but the sound effects are just... fake. I actually turned them off after a few seconds because they were so fake and watched the rest in silence, which I think much improved the video.

Re:Nice Video, But... (2)

ModernGeek (601932) | more than 2 years ago | (#41343293)

::rubs the arms of his chair, and procedes to scratch his tangled neck beard::

I, too believe that it is of poor quality and taste, and that I could have done better.

Totally Awsome (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#41338997)

but are those sounds real, or fake? The article said no sound was recorded, so where did they get the sound?

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339139)

but are those sounds real, or fake?

They're real sounds, they're just not from the actual landing. :-P

The article said no sound was recorded, so where did they get the sound?

The same place Hollywood gets the sound of crashing alien ships.

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339335)

They're real sounds, they're just not from the actual landing. :-P

I didn't realize we had sound effects recorded in a Martian atmosphere.

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339373)

I didn't realize we had sound effects recorded in a Martian atmosphere.

No, I mean "real" as in you can here them -- you're not just imagining the sound, it's real.

But it likely has nothing whatsoever to do with any actual landing or Mars.

There are no "fake" sounds, only sounds being passed off as something else.

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339471)

There are no "fake" sounds, only sounds being passed off as something else.

Heh.

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

Nationless (2123580) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339145)

According to Curiosity itself https://twitter.com/MarsCuriosity/status/232524619528167425 [twitter.com] there's no microphone. So those sounds were either recorded during some other project or made in a studio somewhere specifically for that video.

Re:Totally Awsome (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41339245)

Sound was added to make it feel more real.

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339279)

But considering how thin Mars atmosphere is, would we really here sounds like that? It's like movies with big explosions in space, when in reality there is no sound in space.

Re:Totally Awsome (2)

Alkonaut (604183) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339411)

If you imagine sitting inside the spaceship, where there would then be an atmosphere, you would be hearing noises produced by the craft itself, even if there is no atmosphere outside.

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

yagu (721525) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339391)

shouldn't sound be added to make is sound more real??

Re:Totally Awsome (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339607)

If a spacecraft lands on a planet but there is no one there to hear it, does it make a sound?

Correct name (1)

Demolition (713476) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339071)

Filmmaker Brad Canning

FYI. His first name is Bard, not Brad.

Video in normal format (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41339093)

The same viewable without Flash, please?

What about the sound ??? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41339105)

What about the sound, was it from original footage or it is collage ??

Neat. (1)

Nationless (2123580) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339119)

That's very neat and all, but a little too much fake production values for my tastes. Curiosity does not have a microphone so the sounds are fake and the video is clearly not natively 30fps.

Again, very neat.

The video is of aeroshell's decent, not Curiosty's (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41339137)

Curiosity and its rocket pack carrier are what drop away at the start. The descent video is that of the aeroshell hurtling in (not soft nor rocket assisted). Granted it would be a similar scene I suppose, and there is merit in that, but the title the press is giving it is confusing some.

Re:The video is of aeroshell's decent, not Curiost (4, Informative)

Jesse_vd (821123) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339567)

You've got it completely backwards. This video is from the bottom of Curiosity. The heat shield falls away at the start, before that the camera couldn't see anything.

Re:The video is of aeroshell's decent, not Curiost (1)

bkk_diesel (812298) | more than 2 years ago | (#41352313)

It's pretty cool that you can see the heat shield impact the ground at 1:20. (Towards the bottom of the screen, maybe a quarter of a frame from the right side and just a bit up from the bottom).

Re:The video is of aeroshell's decent, not Curiost (1)

mk1004 (2488060) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339627)

That's the heat shield dropping away at the start. The video was taken by Mars Descent Imager that was on the bottom of Curiosity. http://msl-scicorner.jpl.nasa.gov/Instruments/MARDI/ [nasa.gov] The title is accurate.

Re:The video is of aeroshell's decent, not Curiost (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339631)

I'm guessing you didn't watch the whole thing? Go back and do so.

Credit where credit is due. (2)

Beat The Odds (1109173) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339155)

Glad to see that Mars got mentioned in the closing credits.

Great, more fodder for the nuts (1)

flibbidyfloo (451053) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339181)

Just what we needed... more "proof" that all space-landing related video is faked. Look how realistic we can make it look now!

Just what the conspiracy nuts ordered :)

Can we use this technology on... (1, Funny)

flibbidyfloo (451053) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339199)

...the newly released and terribly blurry photos of Kate Middleton's tits? And what kinds of sounds would he add to that film?

Re:Can we use this technology on... (3, Funny)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339385)

...the newly released and terribly blurry photos of Kate Middleton's tits? And what kinds of sounds would he add to that film?

My sound effects would sound not unlike a motorboat. ;-)

Interpolation (1)

markian (745705) | more than 2 years ago | (#41339521)

I'm not an expert, so please correct me: Wouldn't going from SD to HD be interpolation? Where's the extrapolation?

Re:Interpolation (3, Informative)

F.Ultra (1673484) | more than 2 years ago | (#41341707)

It's not SD to HD the source was HD to begin with, the change is 4fps to 60fps.

Conservatives! Ugh! (1, Insightful)

kurt555gs (309278) | more than 2 years ago | (#41340157)

This movie almost makes me feel sorry for those that think this one rocket is a waste of money, while 10,000 with nuclear bombs on top aren't. Almost.

Very well done, but it's not "Ultra-HD". (1)

pecosdave (536896) | more than 2 years ago | (#41340503)

Ultra-HD - also known as 4K [ultrahdtv.net] isn't 1080, it's 2160. Hate to nit-pick, but this article is going to look incredibly stupid still lingering on the web after 4K comes out, especially since the spec already exist and if you really want to shell out you can get an Ultra-HDTV today.

His name is BARD Canning... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41340667)

...not Brad.

Higher quality for real? (1)

Twinbee (767046) | more than 2 years ago | (#41341633)

So what's stopping us getting this quality (along with some sound) for real? I heard NASA didn't include a microphone, because the extra weight would be costly, but they're not considering the impact it would have on the public's imagination (and hence potential funding) for future projects.

umm. only 3 minutes of "hell"? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41342101)

I thought it took 7 minutes for the decent. I understand that this is after the heat shield is ejected, but what about the 4 previous minutes - no other cameras running? Missed "opportunity" IMHO. (sorry for the pun, but not really)..

understandable... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41342865)

We're all wondering why this took so long and joke abounded from Lucas' legacy,
but the real issue was, in fact, very technical in nature.

They had to wait for the sub'd version to come out.

Bitcoin! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41344925)

Check out the youtube page: He accepts Bitcoin donations!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Esj5juUzhpU&feature=youtu.be

Sound effects (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#41347245)

He obviously is a photo guy. Those sound effects are confusing at best and there is no sound for the crane deployment.

That mind-boggling abrupt stop at the end and the "airbag" pops don't seem quite right. I wonder how many Gs the rover sustained at that moment.

well that was... (1)

NumenMaster (618275) | more than 2 years ago | (#41362247)

freaking wicked
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?