Mars Opportunity anomalies

[ArMaP]

I get all my images from the exploratorium.

I prefer the original source.

[ArMaP]

Thanks for the info! However, I haven't the foggiest where in the name the sol day is. With one of your links, I guess you have to "figure it out"

The sol is not directly on the file name, it's in the characters from position 3 to position 1, in this case 391225438. That number is the number of seconds since January 1, 2000 at 11:58:55.816 UTC. In this case, 391225438 seconds is the same as 391225438/3600/24 = 4528 days. January 1, 2000 + 4528 days = May 25, 2012.

I have several "Rat Tool" pics with the abrasions, but nothing so far that are like these. the ring dia seems to look about the same size, which is about 2 inches in dia.

They have used it in this way several times, just to "take a look" at some places.

Unless the sand has partially covered the normal full circular appearance of the rat tool marks, then this must be something else. Besides, I think the Tool is used basically on rocks, and not on "sand".

The abrasion tool is used on rocks, but the arm doesn't have just the abrasion tool, it also has the microscopic camera, the Mössbauer spectrometer and the alpha particle x-ray spectrometer.

[taintedsample]

Do we get a return on bottles? 

(source http://qt.exploratorium.edu/mars/opportunity/pancam/2011-02-19/)

[rdunk]

Well taintedsample, that is a good pic. but, maybe you could point out the piece(s) that might have a bottle look. I have enlarged it even more, and I am not able to see what you likely are describing. I do see two somewhat rounded features, one near the ridge, and one down to the mid right side. Maybe those are what you are referring to?

Besides that, I wouldn't know where to "return a bottle" anyway!!!

[taintedsample]

oh sorry, I'll add arrows and circles in the future. in the attachment, look all the way to the right. it looks like a vase laying on its side.

[rdunk]

Yes, I now see what you are referring to. The object seems to be symmetric, and has what looks like a perfectly round and open "mouth, which faces the camera. Don't know what it is, but is does look anomalous.

Just for kicks, I certainly am no geologist, but I have seen too many areas of sand, like this one, in craters, to just outright accept it as "natural. Of course, they could be, but just look at this crater, and its sand. First off, sand generally should be mostly in the bottom of whatever it is in, because sand is generally loose, and responds to gravity, and wind. The sand here is not only on the bottom and on the mounded areas, it also is going fairly evenly up the side of the steep embankment/cliff-like area, nearly up to the top in a significant ares. See how it looks going across the side of the cliff, so even, as if it has been applied?

Also, one can see in this pic, that the "sands" are two different colors. The sand going up the hill is darker than the sand at the lower area, where we can see the two sands coming together. And if the sand were as loose as the "waves" make it appear, then the sand certainly would not cling significantly to a near vertical surface, as it does with some parts of the cliff.

Of course, don't know what "they might be trying to cover up anyway - maybe some more bottles, like this one!

Just my opinions, of course. 

[ArMaP]

The sand here is not only on the bottom and on the mounded areas, it also is going fairly evenly up the side of the steep embankment/cliff-like area, nearly up to the top in a significant ares. See how it looks going across the side of the cliff, so even, as if it has been applied?

That's probably because of the wind coming mostly from the opposite direction.

Sand can be blown upwards, that's how dunes are created.

Here is (false) colour version of that image.

(click for full size)

[deuem]

Hi, I did a blow up of your posted photo 1N138388241EFF2700P1994R0M1 log

In the upper right corner is a very bright object/reflection. It is almost at 255 white or blown out completely so it is very white.  You will notice that there is a red block drawn around the object. This pixel disruption is often considered to be an indication of manipulation.

Original blown up from photo



On many photos with bright lights I have been finding these squares and I am getting used to them as a pixel block that got over whelmed with light and not a GCI pasted block.  In the second photo you can see where the darker lines run through the pixel block and maintain the integrity. They are high lighted in red.

Processed Pixel Block



I bet if we can figure out the CCD on this camera and get the pixel block numbers of RGB groupings it should work out just right. It would also be good for sizing things. So how many RGB pixels make up a block with this camera?  X by Y

In the photo we have a shadow running left to right and then it gets big at the end like it hit a mound of dirt. But the shadow did not change the light. It looks like the light is in front of the shadow. The object seems to have no shadow of its own; It is much taller or much closer than the rock on the left and look at the length of that shadow.

Is it a photo blemish or what?

Deuem

[ArMaP]

In the upper right corner is a very bright object/reflection. It is almost at 255 white or blown out completely so it is very white.  You will notice that there is a red block drawn around the object. This pixel disruption is often considered to be an indication of manipulation.

That bright object is part of the heat shield that protected the rover during the landing (or is it Marsing ), and the dark area on the ground is the disturbed soil on the landing spot.

Those "pixel disruptions" are a result of the JPEG compression, it's more noticeable in highly compressed images and where there's a sharp difference in colour or brightness.

I bet if we can figure out the CCD on this camera and get the pixel block numbers of RGB groupings it should work out just right. It would also be good for sizing things. So how many RGB pixels make up a block with this camera?  X by Y

No RGB on that camera, it's a greyscale camera with a filter wheel in front of it to let only some wavelengths pass to the camera. One of the filters is empty to allow for a real greyscale photo of the target.

The sensor is 1024 x 1024 pixels.

In the photo we have a shadow running left to right and then it gets big at the end like it hit a mound of dirt. But the shadow did not change the light. It looks like the light is in front of the shadow. The object seems to have no shadow of its own; It is much taller or much closer than the rock on the left and look at the length of that shadow.

No shadow, it's dark soil, exposed by the landing.

[deuem]

If the sensor is 1024 sq then why are we getting oblong photos? are they cropping them?

Do you know why no shadow on the heat shield, I will have to revist this photo with your info in hand. You guys have been tracking this project from every angle.

and where there's a sharp difference in colour or brightness.

So do you agree on how it affects the camera? If it was all compression the entire photo should look this way. I only see this happen in high light areas. On this camera, even if it is gray scale, it shold have groups, no?

I need your help to figure this camera out so when I get to CAD I can scale it correctly.

Deuem

[ArMaP]

If the sensor is 1024 sq then why are we getting oblong photos? are they cropping them?

Sometimes they have what they call "Sub-Frame" images, I think that's when they cannot get the whole image for some reason, but most photos are square, including photo 1N138388241EFF2700P1994R0M1, that you can see below in PNG format, without any compression artefacts.

(That's why I prefer the original sources )
Click for full size

Do you know why no shadow on the heat shield, I will have to revist this photo with your info in hand. You guys have been tracking this project from every angle.

Why should there be a shadow?
I forgot to say that most of that white area is sensor overload, as it wasn't it was too much light for it.

And yes, to some of us these photos are almost part of the family.

So do you agree on how it affects the camera? If it was all compression the entire photo should look this way. I only see this happen in high light areas.

It doesn't affect the camera, it's a compression artefact, as the JPEG algorithm divides the images in 8 x 8 squares with which it works. When there's a sharp change in brightness or colour (JPEG also changes colours to achieve higher compression ratios) it's more noticeable.

On this camera, even if it is gray scale, it shold have groups, no?

I don't understand what you mean by that, sorry.

I need your help to figure this camera out so when I get to CAD I can scale it correctly.

Scale what?

PS: Looking better at this photo, I don't think that's the place where the Rover landed, but just some place where part of the shield fell.

[taintedsample]

X marks the spot
(pointing it out in the attachment)

[rdunk]

Well tainted, the feature inside your attachment box is interesting! What do you think it is??

Whatever it is, it seems to be supported by a structural piece behind it, that has two "attach arms", to hold it in position. There also seems to be some type of "white feature directly behind it. Of course, size of the features are anyones's guess as well.

Now, I did mention in a prior reply that I thought the sand dunes might be applied. Well, with the pic you gave us here, with the "boxed" attachment, there seems to possibly be some proof of that.

I am posting another attachment, from your pic, which shows your "box", and just above it, I have "ringed" a part of the dune, where one can see a "white object" just under the surface of the "supposedly sand". The white object is not hard to see, and it is perfectly oval in shape, with a couple of surface features near the right side of it. I do wonder what else might be "hidden" here??

[deuem]

Hi tainted, will also look at both photos and see what is up

Rdunk, yours also.

ArMap, to scale the entire photo to real size.

Tainted, I know this is a little off topic but you have seen some of my math work ups before and TLM ( the living moon ) has not. I work with photo planes. If I know the camera focal length I can figure out how big the picture is if I have 1 known or guess at 1 object. Compare this photo to other knows such a topo maps or other photos and we can develop the 3rd dimension of depth of field. If I can get that, I can reset the photo plane to that area and measure size and distance from the camera.  It is a process I am still working on. WIP ( work in process ) and it needs your help. This time it is a process we can all do if you have a CAD program. Maybe even the free CAD light would work? I will bring the math end into the Deuem thread so it won't clutter this Mars photo thread. Tainted can then pull anything he wants over to help out.

Deuem

ps, I meant to write rectangular photos and not oblong. My fingers never listen to me. Thank you for no criticism on that.

[zorgon]

Do you know why no shadow on the heat shield, I will have to revist this photo with your info in hand. You guys have been tracking this project from every angle.

Yup been looking at those heat shields for some time



















And here is Opportunity's landing pad