Now Curiosity rover beams back 3D snaps of Mars
The Mars-trekking Curiosity rover has beamed back the first 3D image of the dusty terrain it's trundling across. 3D pic of Mars terrain from Curiosity With 3D specs... The intrepid rover is currently familiarising itself with the Gale Crater after its successful landing three days ago and has sent back a 2D and 3D shot of …
This topic is closed for new posts.
You'd think that in an office of software and hardware engineers either someone would have some 3D specs or else we could make some. It's not rocket science.
I'll have to go on a hunt :)
Buy Quality Street.
Place one Strawberry-whatever wrapper on one eye. One of those cyan Almondy-thing wrappers on the other eye. Swap eyes if you feel like the world is escaping for you.
Done.
No, McGyver would have shaped the tin into a knife and bomb-proof hat, melted the chocolates into a burning paste which he fired out of a gun fashioned from the remains of the tin, used the wrappers to build a stained-glass silhouette of himself to put into a window to distract someone below, and used the little piece of paper that tells you which chocolate is which to form an origami raft to send a message downriver to the sheriff station asking for backup.
Amateur.
curious
Does the rover have a speaker onboard so that we can relay someone's voice to Mars?
Re: curious
G-g-get your ass to Mars... G-g-get your ass to Mars...
Re: curious
Does the rover have a speaker onboard so that we can relay someone's voice to Mars?
And which atmosphere would that work in? Surface pressure is less than 1% what it is on Earth.
No anaglyph please
These images are for red & green glasses. Can't Nasa release these pictures in a format that can be displayed on a 3D TV in real colors?
Re: No anaglyph please
No glasses required: If they'd just release them as a side by side pair of monochrome images, then a little bit of eye crossing would do nicely.
Re: No anaglyph please
Or you could save the some work and just separate the channels yourself. They must be quite busy at the moment!
Re: No anaglyph please
There will still be ghosting - you cannot completely restore an image from anaglyph.
They should just use a site like Phereo and upload MPO or side by side JPG to it. The site's viewer can then show it in many formats...
@Helix Re: No anaglyph please
"These images are for red & green glasses."
They look like red-cyan to me.
Re: No anaglyph please
What the hell is wrong with you? NASA has just sent a vehicle the size of a car 350 million miles on a journey taking 8 and a half months, eventually landing on an alien planet via rocket powered crane with such success that they had to check and recheck the instrument readings because it was far more successful than their own simulations ever predicted it would be, and what do you say? "I don't like the image format"
Just fuck off.
Re: No anaglyph please
agree completly. if they have the tech to send this the rover to mars, and then images back, then they could have the decency to use a decent format. side by side please boffins.
Re: No anaglyph please
It's for the kids man, you know, for the little kiiiiiids!
Re: No anaglyph please
"Well, if they can send humans to the moon, why can't they select a better format?"
You could also ask yourself - 'why didn't they use an iPhone as the camera? it's ok quality, too, and much cheaper'
It's so easy to complain -- but i'm suspecting he was trolling...
Re: No anaglyph please
The raw images from the left and right cameras are on the NASA website. Download those and do the image processing yourself if it bothers you so much.
Trundling?
" The Mars-trekking Curiosity rover has beamed back the first 3D image of the dusty terrain it's trundling across"
Is it trundling yet?
Re: Trundling?
No it isn't. I seem to recall NASA saying it will be several weeks.
shadows.
Anyone else look hard at the shadow of the Rover on the ground and hope to spot something else?
No, oh just me then.
I'm still not sold on 3D, but this helps
I'm still not sold on 3D, but this helps.
Everytime I see that picture I can't help but feel that my (as many others will I suspect) council are not doing the greatest of jobs repearing pot-holes and cracks in comparision and maybe that in itself is prove of life on Mars. Though that speed hump looks down right silly, even by UK standards.
every bloody time....
I can't find the 3D glasses that I bought after the last time I needed them and didn't have any. Rats!
Cool...
Cool pictures, but that's an awfull lot of Money just to find out if Elvis really is there.
Mast deployed
@MarsCuriosity tweeted about 30 mins ago, it's deployed its mast now!
Curiosity needs it's own section
I think it's time Curiosity got it's own Reg section not just Space
Re: Curiosity needs its own section
And were would they get enough material to fill such a section? Just out of curiosity.
Re: Curiosity needs its own section
I'd guess he doesn't have to iron a shirt in the morning so set his alarm clock 10 minutes later?
How long does data take to get to and from mars? I assume this will vary wildly based on differences in orbit etc
The figure being quoted at the moment is 14 minutes, but I'd imagine you're right that there would be quite a bit of variety there. From back-of-a-beermat calculations using rough values, I'm estimating anything from three to twenty minutes would be possible.
As a follow on from this, assuming line of sight and technical possibility, how long would light take to travel the same distance?
I don't know how reliable this site is, but it looks pretty accurate:
http://www.astrosurf.com/luxorion/qsl-mars-communication3.htm
Cheers
I'm no physicist but I think radio waves travel at the speed of light in a vacuum.
Light (visible) and radio waves are all electromagnetic radiation, and all travel at the same speed (max 3x10^8m/s)
@Annihilator - Trundling yet?
It's just having a quiet smoke. Feeling pretty pleased with itself. Having a bit of a nap.
And WAHEY!
I reckon it's gonna be a right little goer!
I'm politically against things like this because there are people starving in the world and the money could be so much better spent elsewhere. Then again, I am a right boring bastard with no friends. So maybe watching it trundling around might be quite good entertainment after all.
Never let it be said I did not embrace hypocrisy with both mandibles. Shit I think I got my posts mixed up....
Re: @Annihilator - Trundling yet?
I'm politically for things like this because they are peaceful and expand human horizons, inspire children to learn and take up science as a career.
I'm politically against military spending because it's not right to build things that are capable of killing people and destroying homes and infrastructure. Now I am no idiot and know that a military will always be needed but just by shaving a few zero's off the end of the budgets all over the world will free up so much cash that it could all but end world hunger, poverty and substandard medical care.
Re: it's not right to build things that are capable of killing people...
I agree! It's high time we stopped makeing cars, airliners, trains, ships, medicines...
Re: it's not right to build things that are capable of killing people...
Oninoshiko, I think you missed the cowards point.
Its one thing to build a nailgun for the building of shelter,
its another to buils a 50 cal sniper rifle that can only be used for killing people a mile away , impressive though it is ,
much less an ICBM that can kill a million people on a different continent.
Re: it's not right to build things that are capable of killing people...
That's not what (s)he said, it's not even close. (s)he said that we shouldn't build things capible of killing people. each of these things kill people every day. Say what you mean.
And while not a grammer issue, I did use an icon indicating that I was being pedantic.
Hazard-Avoidance Cameras
"Hazard-Avoidance Cameras"
Do these operate in the same way as peril sensitiver sunglasses?
This topic is closed for new posts.
