Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Billion-Pixel View of Mars Snapped By Curiosity

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the see-any-good-landing-spots? dept.

Mars 32

astroengine writes "If you were in any doubt as to Curiosity's photography prowess, this panorama of Gale Crater should allay your concerns. In this billion-pixel photo from Mars, NASA's Mars Science Laboratory snapped nearly 900 separate images that were then stitched together to create a wonderful high-definition view from the robot's mast-mounted cameras. 'It gives a sense of place and really shows off the cameras' capabilities,' said Bob Deen of the Multi-Mission Image Processing Laboratory at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., who assembled the scene. 'You can see the context and also zoom in to see very fine details.'"

cancel ×

32 comments

Cool (1)

p00kiethebear (569781) | about a year ago | (#44053963)

Does anyone know if they are actually going to bring the rover up the mountain or just put-put around the base?

Windows only? (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about a year ago | (#44054099)

Does not seem to work on Linux (even with Moonlight), checked in FireFox, Opera, and Chromium.
It's no wonder that NASA is rotting away.

Re:Windows only? (4, Informative)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | about a year ago | (#44054203)

It's linked in the article as a jpeg.
http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/jpeg/PIA16919.jpg

Re:Windows only? (1)

flyneye (84093) | about a year ago | (#44055595)

Supercool! Now to figure out whose printer to send it to to print in poster mode. Daddy wants to wallpaper a room, but doesn't want to pay printing charges. BWAHAHAHA!

Re:Windows only? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44057625)

what's windows-only? Panorama worked fine here.

Re:Windows only? (1)

petermgreen (876956) | about a year ago | (#44067557)

Afaict the "cylindrical viewer" is silverlight based, the "panoramic viewer" is flash based.

Re:Cool (2)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about a year ago | (#44054153)

The plan is to ascend Mt. Sharp. I'm not sure how far up they're planning on going, but they want to study the geological layers in the mountain. It's going to take a while to get there, though.

Re:Cool (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | about a year ago | (#44054213)

AFAIK they will bring it at least partway up the mountain, but they'll certainly stop at every interesting bit along the way. The rover is there to look at the interesting bits, climbing the mountain is just a way to get to some of them.

Re:Cool (5, Funny)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#44054247)

Does anyone know if they are actually going to bring the rover up the mountain...?

Patience, grasshopper. With enough time, the mountain will come down to the rover.

Re:Cool (2)

Roman Coder (413112) | about a year ago | (#44054459)

The Mountain called, said he was going over to Muhammad's place instead.

Re:Cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44059635)

No, Mars doesn't have any plate tectonics.

Re:Cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44062537)

No, Mars doesn't have any plate tectonics.

...which is only one way to topple a mountain. Wind erosion, anyone?

hmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44054005)

You can see the studio ceiling

camera greatness?? I think not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44054281)

While the camera on the MSL is no doubt a good camera, it's nothing special. If it takes 900 images to make a 1 000 000 000 pixel image, that means it's a, wait for it, a 1.1 mega pixel camera!! While these numbers aren't exact they're in the ball park and it's clearly nothing more than your average point and shoot or an entry level DSLR.

So please don't go thinking it's one picture taken by a camera that has a 1 giga pixel sensor on it.

thanks.

Re:camera greatness?? I think not... (2)

Whatsisname (891214) | about a year ago | (#44054383)

It's quite a bit more than an 'entry level' DSLR. Bring an entry level DSLR to a high-radiation environment like outer space and see how well it keeps taking pictures.

Re:camera greatness?? I think not... (4, Informative)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about a year ago | (#44054411)

If it takes 900 images to make a 1 000 000 000 pixel image, that means it's a, wait for it, a 1.1 mega pixel camera!! While these numbers aren't exact they're in the ball park

Might as well go for the actual numbers, right? The original image is 1.3 billion pixels, not exactly 1 billion. The MastCam (2 cameras) can take true-color still pictures at 1600x1200, just below 2 million pixels. It can also take video at 10fps at 1280x720 (720p). There's another camera, the Mars Hand Lens Imager, which also takes 1600x1200 pictures but is meant for closeups, it has a focal length between 18 - 21 mm and can zoom up to 14.5 micrometers per pixel. The descent imager is also 1600x1200, but its job is done. There are 13 other cameras at lower resolution. The rover has far and away the best camera suite we've dropped on to Mars.

So please don't go thinking it's one picture taken by a camera that has a 1 giga pixel sensor on it.

Don't worry, anyone who got to the second sentence in the summary knows that.

Re:camera greatness?? I think not... (4, Funny)

Dishevel (1105119) | about a year ago | (#44054505)

So please don't go thinking it's one picture taken by a camera that has a 1 giga pixel sensor on it.

Don't worry, anyone who got to the second sentence in the summary knows that.

So .... At least 30% of Slashdot?

Re:camera greatness?? I think not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44055705)

70% of Slashdotters are just smart enough to understand everything from the first sentence.

Re:camera greatness?? I think not... (2)

Gamasta (557555) | about a year ago | (#44058621)

Not impressed by a 1-2 MP camera? Well: it was tested and developed for about 5 years before getting on the rover, which means it didn't get further in the chip development road.

Industry graded cameras are still in the VGA-5 MP range. Check out companies like ISVI, AVT, PointGrey, Basler. Only specialized companies offer sensors like 29MP full frame chips. The grunt work is done in low megapixels.

did anyone else notice (2)

danielnashnz (1755160) | about a year ago | (#44054763)

the pattern of dots at x:15130, y:2472 ?

shiny object found (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44054883)

Love viewing these pics of Mars landscape. Anyone know what this might be? I found it zooming in near Curiosity. At first I thought it may be a part of Curiosity but there are no tracks around it, it's undisturbed. 1st pic of object is http://i.imgur.com/q3TnsQb.jpg and area found is http://i.imgur.com/VaIYIa6.jpg

Metalic object on mars? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44055013)

Just found this: http://i.imgur.com/3ISU6wQ.png

It's very near the exact center of the image.

Meh (1)

Greyfox (87712) | about a year ago | (#44055123)

Odd. I thought I'd react with more excitement to decent photos from another world. For some reason there's really not a lot of sense of wonder there. Maybe if that other world were a somewhat more interesting tourist destination...

Re:Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44055553)

I'm old enough to remember using a phone where an operator came on and asked "What number, please?". That was the early '50's, at the dawn of the space age. And now we have a robotic laboratory on Mars looking for environments favorable to life. Perhaps it's an age thing where I remember using quaint technology and, having witnessed the steady development of technology that led to some of the most astounding engineering feats in human history, I'm just awestruck at what NASA has done. Don't worry if you're not as amazed as I am. Over the next 50 years you'll see many stunning technological breakthroughs. I'll go out on a limb here and predict you'll be witness to even more amazing things than I've seen and, yes, it will excite you as you remember today as what once was a simpler and quaint time. I envy you.

Re:Meh (1)

thrich81 (1357561) | about a year ago | (#44061495)

Correct, but incomplete -- By 1976 (only 19 years after Sputnik 1) we had two nuclear powered, robot laboratories (Vikings 1 and 2) on Mars looking for life and signs of life and taking awesome pictures. So now it is 37 years later and we have Curiosity, a nuclear powered, robot laboratory looking for signs of life and taking awesome pictures, which can move around on Mars. The leap from Sputnik to Viking sure seems to be a lot more than that from Viking to Curiosity. Not to dismiss the awesomeness of Curiosity, but most of the really incredible stuff in space exploration had already been done by the first 25 years. I'll go out on a limb here but say that for pure wonder at the advancement of space exploration, science, and engineering I doubt we'll see anything in the next 50 years which matches 1950-2000 or 1900-1950 before that.

So basically one roll of film? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44055399)

A single roll of 120 film (medium format) run through an old 1950's Hasselblad, digitally stitched together, provides over a billion pixels of resolution (and waaaay more dynamic range). Not impressed!

Re:So basically one roll of film? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44057481)

But how do you get the film back to Earth?

Re:So basically one roll of film? (1)

mug funky (910186) | about a year ago | (#44058827)

look up MTFs. film ain't so flash anymore.

besides, i wonder how the film would look after going through radiation belts for months?

waste of feckin-A film (1)

noshellswill (598066) | about a year ago | (#44055567)

Desert ? Wide angle lens ?? Drive 100 feckin-A miles east of La and you'll find **LOTS** of wide angle desert scenes. Cheap to shoot too,  with biker babes and scorpions not like on Mars where 2-billion year old dried puke is the best offered. Tell me again ... how many grouse, speckled trout or cancer-cures-per-pixel did that Marsaphilia cost ?

The lizard (1)

Old Wolf (56093) | about a year ago | (#44055679)

Does this photo have another angle on the Mars lizard [huffingtonpost.co.uk] ?

Rectangle (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44056693)

Can we take a moment to talk about that rectangle? And another moment to jaw drop in awe at more Mars photos? Just think about it, that's frakin' Mars!!

Fuck off NASA (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#44058087)

You'll be installing Microsoft Silverlight

Your Jedi mind-tricks don't work on me.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...