Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Billion-Pixel View of Mars Snapped By Curiosity

Posted by Soulskill on from the see-any-good-landing-spots? dept.

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.'"

32 comments

  1. Cool by p00kiethebear · · Score: 1

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

    --
    The Blade Itself
    1. Re:Cool by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      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.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Cool by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

      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.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    3. Re:Cool by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Funny

      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.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Cool by Roman+Coder · · Score: 2

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

      --
      "The future can only affect the present if there is room to write its influence off as a mistake." - Yakir Aharonov
    5. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Mars doesn't have any plate tectonics.

    6. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Mars doesn't have any plate tectonics.

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

  2. hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can see the studio ceiling

  3. Windows only? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

    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.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Windows only? by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 4, Informative

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

      --
      Not a sentence!
    2. Re:Windows only? by flyneye · · Score: 1

      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!

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    3. Re:Windows only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

    4. Re:Windows only? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

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

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  4. camera greatness?? I think not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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.

  5. Re:camera greatness?? I think not... by Whatsisname · · Score: 2

    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.

  6. Re:camera greatness?? I think not... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Informative

    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.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  7. Re:camera greatness?? I think not... by Dishevel · · Score: 4, Funny

    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?

    --
    Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
  8. did anyone else notice by danielnashnz · · Score: 2

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

  9. shiny object found by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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

  10. Metalic object on mars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

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

  11. Meh by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    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...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      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.

    2. Re:Meh by thrich81 · · Score: 1

      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.

  12. So basically one roll of film? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    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!

    1. Re:So basically one roll of film? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But how do you get the film back to Earth?

    2. Re:So basically one roll of film? by mug+funky · · Score: 1

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

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

  13. The lizard by Old+Wolf · · Score: 1

    Does this photo have another angle on the Mars lizard ?

  14. Re:camera greatness?? I think not... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

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

  15. Rectangle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    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!!

  16. Fuck off NASA by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    You'll be installing Microsoft Silverlight

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

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  17. Re:camera greatness?? I think not... by Gamasta · · Score: 2

    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.

    --
    reason defies logic