The Mars Job

[Hervé]

I don't know how many of you have seen this picture:

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/609/cache/space220-mars-rover_60937_600x450.jpg
Rover Self-Portrait Image courtesy MSSS/Caltech/NASA

Ready for its closeup but all alone on Mars (http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/space/solar-system/mars-article/), NASA (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/09/120913-curiosity-drive-mars-science-laboratory-nasa-space-science/NASA)'s rover Curiosity (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/) created this self-portrait on Halloween. The image was stitched together from 55 high-resolution shots snapped by the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI), perched on the end of Curiosity's robotic arm.

The pictures were taken at "Rocknest," the location in Gale Crater where the mission first scoop-sampled Martian soil. Four scoop scars remain visible in the soil in front the rover, while the base of three-mile-high (five-kilometer-high) Mount Sharp rises to the right of Curiosity.

The self-portrait isn't just a way to show off Curiosity in action. The image allows scientists and engineers—looking for signs such as wheel wear and dust accumulation—to examine the condition of the rover and see how it has fared on Mars since its August 6 landing (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/08/120806-mars-landing-curiosity-rover-nasa-jpl-science/).
****************************************************************

Very interesting choice wording:

"all alone on Mars (http://science.nationalgeographic.com/science/space/solar-system/mars-article/)"

"self-portrait"

"stitched... 55 high-resolution shots ... (MAHLI), perched on the end of Curiosity's robotic arm. "

The above picture and article were taken from here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/11/pictures/121105-best-space-pictures-220-mars-rover/ ... populated by professional photographers... yet not a peep about something deeply puzzling:

Where are the robotic arm and its shadow in the above picture?

The extended robotic arm and its "Mars Hand Lens Imager" are all nicely self-contained within that "self-portrait," shadows included!

Accordingly, "Curiosity" is not "all alone" since something/someone took that picture, extended robotic arm included. Is it even on Mars?

Once again, the public is being robbed of truth (to fall back on the thread's title).

[RMorgan]

Hey mate,

Well, since it´s a composition of 55 images, the arm might very well have been be super-imposed by other images.

Just like this self-portrait:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/04/10/article-0-1288BC9B000005DC-616_634x398.jpg

So, where´s the camera? :)

"The 'trick' is that the photo isn't in fact one photo at all - it's a compilation of several, with the camera 'snipped out' of the final version.
What you’ll need is a camera, a big mirror and a basic knowledge of Photoshop,' says the blog tutorial entitled Photoshop Subtle Mirror Trick Tutorial.
The theory behind this image is that you’re combining three photos into one. One of each of your hands and a third of your head."

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2127704/Photoshop-mirror-trick-Photographer-takes-impossible-self-portrait-camera.html#ixzz2C8dsVgmm

This guy did this trick with only three images. Imagine what NASA could do with 55.

So, instead of Photoshop, the rover itself (or the NASA computers) probably has set of very complex algorithms to automatically stitch together all 55 pictures, giving the clearest images as possible.

Anyone can do a similar trick with just two images actually. Take one self-picture with the right hand, then, being careful not the change the camera angle, take another one with your left hand and combine both in photoshop. (It´s much easier when you´ve got a steady robotic arm).

Cheers,

Raf.

[DeDukshyn]

Ya that one was kinda easy ... all the arm has to do is flip the camera from one side to the other and then you stitch all the parts together that don't have the arm in it.

Amzer, have you had enough coffee today? ;) ;)

In order for this to work though, the camera should be missing altogether, shouldn't it? ... is the camera in the picture? I don't know which part the camera is ...

[RMorgan]

In order for this to work though, the camera should be missing altogether, shouldn't it? ... is the camera in the picture? I don't know which part the camera is ...

Lol! I have no idea how such kind of camera would look like. I guess it´s got cameras and arms everywhere, since it´s main function is to take pictures and collect samples. :)

[KiwiElf]

Its also how the "perfect" Earth, Moon, Mars etc maps are really a mosaic - created seamlessly from hundreds or thousands of overlapping photographic "tiles". As much artwork as photography ;)

[Operator]

Uh-hm, good discussion by all of you. When I saw the picture I had the same question as Amzer. I like to think about
circumstances when I look at a photo. A little later my attention was also drawn to the 55 separate pictures.

Could it be that they are only mentioned to hide the truth ?

Although the boy in front of the mirror demonstrates that it can be done it doesn't cover a full explanation in case of
the rover. In order to get both arms on the picture he must have changed the camera from one hand to the other.
You can clearly see that his arms are a little malformed because of editing this switch ...
While changing for the next picture it is hard to get the camera in the same position again.

But what about the rover ... there seems to be one arm only and it is in the picture !

So, as far as I can see the case is not completely solved yet.

[angelahedgehog]

Hey what do I know? I'm an amateur happy snapper but ...
I can't see artifacts or join lines where photos have been "seamlessly" joined, there's no change in the dimensions on the landscape, no distortions - if it's a self portrait, maybe it was standing in front of a mirror at the time? Are those footprints to the bottom left (it's bottom right)? It must have been done in a short time frame because there doesn't seem to be any change to shadows etc.

I would love to know how exactly they did it because it would be an interesting technique to know how to use so many shots to make what is effectively a high-res, single focus snapshot ... but I don't believe it was done by itself and that's because it smells a bit fishy .... or is that sand snake?

[RMorgan]

Hey what do I know? I'm an amateur happy snapper but ...
I can't see artifacts or join lines where photos have been "seamlessly" joined, there's no change in the dimensions on the landscape, no distortions - if it's a self portrait, maybe it was standing in front of a mirror at the time? Are those footprints to the bottom left (it's bottom right)? It must have been done in a short time frame because there doesn't seem to be any change to shadows etc.

I would love to know how exactly they did it because it would be an interesting technique to know how to use so many shots to make what is effectively a high-res, single focus snapshot ... but I don't believe it was done by itself and that's because it smells a bit fishy .... or is that sand snake?

Hey mate,

The image itself is made out of 55 5,463 x 7,595 pixels images. It´s huge, actually.

If you download the full-sized image (125Mb), you´ll be able to clearly see the imperfections where the images were merged.

Here´s the download link:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/multimedia/pia16238.html

(Click on download full-sized image, right bellow the image)

Here you can see how the images were merged:

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=7522&st=0

And here are all individual images, in case you´re interested:

http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/raw/?s=85&camera=MAHLI

Cheers,

Raf.

PS: The "footprints" are scoop marks, from where ground samples were extracted.

[angelahedgehog]

If you download the full-sized image (125Mb), you´ll be able to clearly see the imperfections where the images were merged.

Here´s the download link:

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/multimedia/pia16238.html

(Click on download full-sized image, right bellow the image)

Here you can see how the images were merged:

http://www.unmannedspaceflight.com/index.php?showtopic=7522&st=0



G'Day,

That's cool, I'll check it out ... but I'm still quite intrigued how there appears to be no angle distortion along the landscape and whether or not those are independent footprints in the sand I'll need to acquire a thorough understanding of how they did it before I can say more about what I think.
These were my initial questions because I've never had such an effective result using multiple pictures in a pan shot - this is multi angle - it's magnificent.
I know I'm repeating myself but it's a great technique if it's the real thing.

Peace,
Ang

[norman]

My curiosity it more about the color.

I'm quite convinced that they are tweaking all the Mars photos to look sandstone red ( including the sky ). I usually see pictures that are effectively monochrome but shifted to sandstone red. When do we ever see a variation of color in Mars photos? The mono nature of Mars photos has always been the most convincing aspect of them that has persuaded me they are tinting them all.

Now I see this new photo and it's got some natural whiteness in it.

If I'm to stick with the idea that they are lying about the color of Mars, I'm assuming they've done a lot of work on that photo in Photoshop before they released it to the public.

AND !, if the sky is so red, how come those surfaces on the Rover look so naturally white?

Something is wrong with this picture.

[DeDukshyn]

Uh-hm, good discussion by all of you. When I saw the picture I had the same question as Amzer. I like to think about
circumstances when I look at a photo. A little later my attention was also drawn to the 55 separate pictures.

Could it be that they are only mentioned to hide the truth ?

Although the boy in front of the mirror demonstrates that it can be done it doesn't cover a full explanation in case of
the rover. In order to get both arms on the picture he must have changed the camera from one hand to the other.
You can clearly see that his arms are a little malformed because of editing this switch ...
While changing for the next picture it is hard to get the camera in the same position again.

But what about the rover ... there seems to be one arm only and it is in the picture !

So, as far as I can see the case is not completely solved yet.

It would be difficult, but not impossible with only one arm, that arm would have to be able to articulate very well (which I assume is possible of all arms on that thing), and likely a computer algorithm would have to determine the position for all 55 shots -- eyeballing it would be extremely hard for a high quality final product.

If one arm was used - that arm would have to be missing from the picture (it would be neatly cut off from its attachment) -- if two arms were used, both would be in the picture (well, one or both could be missing in this case, but why would you cut them out if you could get both in?)


ADDITION:
Thanks for the link to the 55 pics Raf, I found it a tiny bit odd that in no picture can you see the arm that that is holding the camera ... while not impossible, I find that a bit odd ...

[RMorgan]

Thanks for the link to the 55 pics Raf, I found it a tiny bit odd that in no picture can you see the arm that that is holding the camera ... while not impossible, I find that a bit odd ...

Well, they say that this specific image is composed of 55 shots; probably they´ve shot many more pictures and ended up using only 55 of them.

[DeDukshyn]

Thanks for the link to the 55 pics Raf, I found it a tiny bit odd that in no picture can you see the arm that that is holding the camera ... while not impossible, I find that a bit odd ...

Well, they say that this specific image is composed of 55 shots; probably they´ve shot many more pictures and ended up using only 55 of them.

Or these have already been cropped for stitching (most likely) - in which case they would always crop out the arm ...

[WhiteFeather]

IMHO....This photo was taken here on Earth, probably in some remote desert, not buying this
BullSh!t anymore. Hollywood does some amazing work dont they!!!

N ever
A
S traight
A nswer

[RMorgan]

IMHO....This photo was taken here on Earth, probably in some remote desert, not buying this
BullSh!t anymore. Hollywood does some amazing work dont they!!!


Hey mate,

Well, there´s this possibility indeed!

If it was all CGI, like a computer game, even the regular NASA employees wouldn´t know about that either.

I always thought that all NASA images have this plastic CGI look, but hey, I have no idea how things are supposed to look like outside this planet as well.

Anyway, I couldn´t care less about NASA itself. Even if this stuff is real (I´m inclined to think it is), all they want is to check Mars to see if it has effective mining potential... It´s always about money. They would never do such expensive experiments for the sake of "curiosity". ;)

Cheers,

Raf.

[Hervé]

Seems that Operator is about the only one paying attention:


Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI), perched on the end of Curiosity's robotic arm.

and:


The extended robotic arm and its "Mars Hand Lens Imager" are all nicely self-contained within that "self-portrait," shadows included!

[DeDukshyn]

Seems that Operator is about the only one paying attention:


Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI), perched on the end of Curiosity's robotic arm.

and:


The extended robotic arm and its "Mars Hand Lens Imager" are all nicely self-contained within that "self-portrait," shadows included!


That assumes:

1) The rover has only one camera.

I assume it has more than one.

Can anyone verify the number of cameras and where they are so we can get to the bottom of this? I'm equally curious to be proven wrong (not that I was really making any type of a statement) .. ;)

[DeDukshyn]

Maybe this will help ... ? 17 cameras in all ...

Taken from here: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/08/curiosity-mars-rover-cameras/

Obviously many of those are aren't for optical imaging, but I 'm not sure which can and which can't ...

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2012/08/curiosoitycameras2.jpg

[Gardener]

Hmm certainly a puzzle; there should be NO pictures with the camera in (its behind itself at all times lol) unless there is another camera, taking shot of the camera, or the image stitched from a previously taken shot before alleged mars mission. latter most likely. All goes to support the saying 'believe nothing that you hear and only half of what you see'.

[Hervé]

"Curiosity" has more than one camera from low resolution B&W to high resotion to Macro photo (MHALI).

Here is that "robotic arm":


http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/curiosity-robot-arm-cropped-640x353.jpg


http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/684452main_Robinson-3-pia16145-full_full-640x415.jpg (http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/684452main_Robinson-3-pia16145-full_full.jpg)


http://www.space.com/images/i/11953/original/curiosity-arm-tools.jpg?1315427908 (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/mars-robotic-arm.jpg)
At the end of Curiosity's seven-foot arm is a turret, shaped like a cross. This turret, a hand-like structure, holds various tools that can spin through a 350-degree turning range. At the tip of the arm is the turret structure on which five devices are mounted. Two of these devices are in-situ or contact instruments known as the Alpha Particle X-ray Spectrometer (APXS) and the Mars Hand Lens Imager. The remaining three devices are associated with sample acquisition and sample preparation functions.
CREDIT: Robert Z. Pearlman/SPACE.com
View full size image (http://javascript<b></b>:void(0);)


http://7.mshcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/curiosity-arm.jpg



http://i.space.com/images/i/19900/original/curosity-rover-closeup-art.jpg?1343337679
Navigation mast with a bunch of cameras for stereographic and single pictures. Folded robotic arm on the right.



e1noAqa_Ukc

[DeDukshyn]

Here's a bigger picture: Are there any parts missing? Where's the MAHLI camera?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/PIA16239_High-Resolution_Self-Portrait_by_Curiosity_Rover_Arm_Camera_square.jpg

[DeDukshyn]

Maybe they just used some photoshop editing ... ? Anything is possible these days ... kinda takes the fun out of it ... :(

[Hervé]

Maybe they just used some photoshop editing ... ? Anything is possible these days ... kinda takes the fun out of it ... :(

Most probable.

[DeDukshyn]

here's a reflection from the one big lens (click for larger) ... looks a bit like a robotic arm, but sadly, it could be PSd.

ADDITION:

Well, maybe now we know what the camera that took the picture looked like --- does curiosity have this camera? If not, then that would be cool to know ;)

[Operator]

It would be difficult, but not impossible with only one arm, that arm would have to be able to articulate very well (which I assume is possible of all arms on that thing),




If one arm was used - that arm would have to be missing from the picture (it would be neatly cut off from its attachment)


This looks like a contradiction ...



and likely a computer algorithm would have to determine the position for all 55 shots -- eyeballing it would be extremely hard for a high quality final product.


Agreed, later I had that same thought too. A robotic arm would be perfect for a job like this.




The image was stitched together from 55 high-resolution shots snapped by the Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI), perched on the end of Curiosity's robotic arm.


Knowing Amzer the line above is most likely an accurate representation .... it literally says that the 55 pictures are from the
'Mars Hand Lens Imager (MAHLI)' camera (so a single camera). For me it remains a curious case.

Additionally I would like to question why they invested so much energy in this picture ? Why on Halloween and what is the
value besides nice to have ? Do they feel the need to sell something to the public ?

[Hervé]

... Where's the MAHLI camera?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/PIA16239_High-Resolution_Self-Portrait_by_Curiosity_Rover_Arm_Camera_square.jpg

Somewhere there:


https://qy9cnq.bay.livefilestore.com/y1phnXkv7weody-SIpywHLHP8EzerXMp71rVAFOpqFLlB73AEvShxl9SN1IclbpNOn4vHRosBfA7ypsSGP5QUrzxXupSIAHBJmX/Curiosity%20self%20portrait%2002.jpg?psid=1


Thanks for the high resolution picture.

The robotic arm is unfolded but not part of the self portrait.

Only the shadow of the "lab" at the end of the arm is recorded (fuzzier shadow outline than objects closer to ground).

So, to correct the OP, the camera doing the self-portrait is actually not contained within that self-portrait picture... my bad.

[DeDukshyn]

It would be difficult, but not impossible with only one arm, that arm would have to be able to articulate very well (which I assume is possible of all arms on that thing),




If one arm was used - that arm would have to be missing from the picture (it would be neatly cut off from its attachment)


This looks like a contradiction ...


No ... If one arm is used, it could be done if that arm (or a part of it, to be more accurate) were cut from the final picture in such a way that it didn't impact the final result too much ... that is why I asked where the MAHLI was in my previous post.

[DouglasDanger]

..........
[QUOTE=Amzer Zo;583281]I don't know how many of you have seen this picture:

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/609/cache/space220-mars-rover_60937_600x450.jpg
Rover Self-Portrait Image courtesy MSSS/Caltech/NASA






http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/curiosity-robot-arm-cropped-640x353.jpg


http://www.space.com/images/i/11953/original/curiosity-arm-tools.jpg?1315427908 (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/mars-robotic-arm.jpg)


N.A.S.A
They have gotten the whites closer, but can't seam to recreate the color gold with thier red tweaks.

[DeDukshyn]

So, done with a single arm, one camera, which is missing from the final, which most "likely" explains how it was done. Well done all.

Thanks to Amzer for actually spotting it as my brain was tired ... :P

[Hervé]

..........

I don't know how many of you have seen this picture:

http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/609/cache/space220-mars-rover_60937_600x450.jpg
Rover Self-Portrait Image courtesy MSSS/Caltech/NASA






http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/curiosity-robot-arm-cropped-640x353.jpg


http://www.space.com/images/i/11953/original/curiosity-arm-tools.jpg?1315427908 (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/mars-robotic-arm.jpg)


N.A.S.A
They have gotten the whites closer, but can't seam to recreate the color gold with thier red tweaks.

One could use this one for reference of true colors:


http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/msl/20100916/pia13390-full.jpg
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/msl/20100916/pia13390-full.jpg

[Bill Ryan]

-------

Thank you all -- I fully enjoyed reading this from beginning to end!

:)

[Hervé]

Thank you all for your contributions!It seems that the heist of the robotic arm and its MHALI camera has been satisfactorily solved and therefore put a request to the mods to now close this thread.

Amzer zo

[Bill Ryan]

-------

Request granted. The thread was a credit to Avalon. :)