• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Cool pic from Spirit Rover

All it is, is a missing pixel. Big freaking deal. What do you think it is, a UFO? NOES, teh Martian's will break teh Spirit.
 
actually, it's not a missing pixel,
it's a pissing mixel, a native creature of Mars ! On the picture you can clearly see how it approaches the rover and prepares for a hot shower from above !!!! Disgusting little bastards......
 
Originally posted by: flexy
actually, it's not a missing pixel,
it's a pissing mixel, a native creature of Mars ! On the picture you can clearly see how it approaches the rover and prepares for a hot shower from above !!!! Disgusting little bastards......
Click to expand...

Hahahahahhahah
 
Originally posted by: Yomicron
Originally posted by: rival
thread hijacking, but what kind of camera is on the lil rovers? how many mega pixels ? 🙂
Click to expand...
1 Megapixel
Click to expand...
Wow, that is cool.

I can't wait until NASA digital camera technology filters down to us consumers!! 😀😀

A Sony DSC-F717, with a street price of around $600, has 5.2 million sensors (or 5 megapixels) on a chip that is 8.8 by 6.6 millimeters (or .35 by .26 inches). The Pancam has just a million sensors spread across a chip that's 12 by 12 millimeters -- nearly a half-inch square.

Each tiny Pancam sensor, measured in microns, is nearly four times as big as those on the Sony.

In the consumer market, which Dalsa does not target, 5-megapixel cameras often use the same size CCD as a 3-megapixel camera. More pixels are simply crammed onto the same-size chip.

"The pixels themselves get smaller," Myles said. "This has an impact on image quality."

Why? For one thing, smaller pixels are less light-sensitive.

Also, the lens quality might not support the additional pixels. As the receptors get smaller, a higher quality lens is needed to properly focus light onto each pixel. So where each pixel ought to capture different light information -- say perhaps a subtle shading change on the subject's cheek -- the same information can get spread across several pixels after passing through a lower quality lens.
Click to expand...

That is really interesting ........ Kinda puts the whole "MP = MHz" thing into perspective.
 
Originally posted by: Eli
Originally posted by: Yomicron
Originally posted by: rival
thread hijacking, but what kind of camera is on the lil rovers? how many mega pixels ? 🙂
Click to expand...
1 Megapixel
Click to expand...
Wow, that is cool.

I can't wait until NASA digital camera technology filters down to us consumers!! 😀😀

A Sony DSC-F717, with a street price of around $600, has 5.2 million sensors (or 5 megapixels) on a chip that is 8.8 by 6.6 millimeters (or .35 by .26 inches). The Pancam has just a million sensors spread across a chip that's 12 by 12 millimeters -- nearly a half-inch square.

Each tiny Pancam sensor, measured in microns, is nearly four times as big as those on the Sony.

In the consumer market, which Dalsa does not target, 5-megapixel cameras often use the same size CCD as a 3-megapixel camera. More pixels are simply crammed onto the same-size chip.

"The pixels themselves get smaller," Myles said. "This has an impact on image quality."

Why? For one thing, smaller pixels are less light-sensitive.

Also, the lens quality might not support the additional pixels. As the receptors get smaller, a higher quality lens is needed to properly focus light onto each pixel. So where each pixel ought to capture different light information -- say perhaps a subtle shading change on the subject's cheek -- the same information can get spread across several pixels after passing through a lower quality lens.
Click to expand...

That is really interesting ........ Kinda puts the whole "MP = MHz" thing into perspective.
Click to expand...


hmmm interesting stufff


i haven't heard any news of the other rover.....it landed already didn't it?..arg i gotta get out more hehehe
 
Originally posted by: flexy
actually, it's not a missing pixel,
it's a pissing mixel, a native creature of Mars ! On the picture you can clearly see how it approaches the rover and prepares for a hot shower from above !!!! Disgusting little bastards......
Click to expand...

lol 🙂

Anyway, yes, the other rover, the Opportunity, is currently rolling around the flat highlands of Mars. The landing was spectacular.
 
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov/spotlight/spirit/a12_20040128.html"> Revealing Mars? True Colors
</a> from marsrovers.jpl.nasa.gov, on the second page is info about the large blank boxes.


Picture with black dot over mountain, looks like they have 3 pixels gone bad. That one over the 1/3 from the right and 1/3 the way down, also 2 others in the upper left that are together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top