Mars Rover 17 Cameras?

lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
edited August 12, 2012 in Cameras
Mars rover Curiosity has 17 cameras. I did a web search to try and learn what type of cameras and lens they are using. No luck.

Anybody have info. on this?

Just Curious
Phil
http://www.PhilsImaging.com
"You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
Phil

Comments

  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,967 moderator
    edited August 8, 2012
    There's a bit of information here, but not enough to satisfy most of us, I think: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/08/curiosity-mars-rover-cameras/
    My Pics
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited August 8, 2012
    Richard wrote: »
    There's a bit of information here, but not enough to satisfy most of us, I think: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/08/curiosity-mars-rover-cameras/

    Good find. I sent email to NASA asking for details. i wonder if they will respond.
    Phil
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • JCJC Registered Users Posts: 768 Major grins
    edited August 8, 2012
    more technical specs
    http://msl-scicorner.jpl.nasa.gov/Instruments/Mastcam/

    and other links to the left.
    Yeah, if you recognize the avatar, new user name.
  • thegridrunnerthegridrunner Registered Users Posts: 235 Major grins
    edited August 8, 2012
    I pretty sure they are using Canon sensors. You can tell by all the banding in the shadow areas.
    Nikon D800, D7000, 14-24,24-70, 70-200 Nikkor and stuff
    http://www.youtube.com/user/NYCFilmmakersGroup
    http://www.meetup.com/NYC-Filmmakers-and-Actors-Meetup-Group/
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited August 8, 2012
    thegridrunner wrote: »
    I pretty sure they are using Canon sensors. You can tell by all the banding in the shadow areas.

    If they had taken a Nikon camera instead, we'd be getting a transmission
    from Mars every 30 seconds, saying "Hi, I'm a Nikon".
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • WatersideWaterside Registered Users Posts: 4 Big grins
    edited August 9, 2012
    Wow - it took only until the fourth reply for this to degrade to a Canon vs Nikon rant :(

    Interestingly my understanding is they use primarily Kodak sensors and all of the images returned so far have been from those. The MastCams use 2MP HD-capable sensors, and the MSL is able to compose large panoramas similar to its twin rover predecessors.

    [Edit]: Four sensors (2 Mastcam, MARDI, MAHLI) are a Kodak sensor produced by Truesense Imaging. Twelve other sensors (2 Hazcam at each corner, 4 Navcam) are produced by Teledyne DALSA using a NASA design. The Navcams are the same as those on the current rover twins Spirit and Opportunity.

    Some additional detail:
    http://www.truesenseimaging.com/news-and-events/34-msl-landing
    http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/news/pdfs/MSLLanding.pdf
    http://www.asdnews.com/news-40023/Teledyne_DALSA-Manufactured_Sensors_to_Guide_NASA_Rover_on_Current_Mission_to_Mars.htm
    http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2011/pdf/2738.pdf
    http://www-robotics.jpl.nasa.gov/publications/Reg_Willson/2003JE002077.pdf
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited August 10, 2012
    I think a rant looks different, where is your sense of humor ;) Everybody knows they use custom build cameras that aren't really comparable to mass production cameras. thumb.gif
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • WatersideWaterside Registered Users Posts: 4 Big grins
    edited August 11, 2012
    Manfr3d wrote: »
    I think a rant looks different, where is your sense of humor ;) Everybody knows they use custom build cameras that aren't really comparable to mass production cameras. thumb.gif
    Your reply did seem a little more "outrageous" ("humorous"?) but the one before yours was difficult to tell. Smileys go a long way to showing humor. Considering the contentiousness of canon vs nikon threads here (and elsewhere) it really is difficult to tell, and considering only the fourth reply was a dig on one (without smileys) it is disappointing. Not all are aware that (1) there are many other sensor designs and fabrications and (2) Canon ond Nikon are consumer/prosumer/professional market and not scientific market.
  • Manfr3dManfr3d Registered Users Posts: 2,008 Major grins
    edited August 11, 2012
    Waterside wrote: »
    Your reply did seem a little more "outrageous" ("humorous"?) but the one before yours was difficult to tell.

    The one before was simply trolling. To avoid a flamewar I exaggerated his
    false statement with another, obviously even more false statement. I thought
    it would be a nicer way to tell the person that his statement can only be taken
    as humor, instead of saying what he said was preoccupied, nonsense.

    It is known know by now that shaddow noise/banding is no issue in real
    life, and that it can usualy be avoided by making a proper exposure, provided
    the person operating the camera knows what he/she is doing.

    beer.gif
    “To consult the rules of composition before making a picture is a little like consulting the law of gravitation before going for a walk.”
    ― Edward Weston
  • colourboxcolourbox Registered Users Posts: 2,095 Major grins
    edited August 12, 2012
    thegridrunner wrote: »
    I pretty sure they are using Canon sensors. You can tell by all the banding in the shadow areas.
    Manfr3d wrote: »
    It is known know by now that shaddow noise/banding is no issue in real
    life, and that it can usualy be avoided by making a proper exposure, provided
    the person operating the camera knows what he/she is doing.

    OK, so platform wars aside, I was watching a playback of one of the NASA press conferences and they have the project's imaging chief on the panel. The guy responsible for all the cameras. A journalist asked how true the soil color was in the photo from the camera under the rover. The NASA imaging guy explained that he wouldn't trust the color because the shadows were boosted significantly, and they did that because they intentionally underexposed a lot of pictures, and they did that because they hadn't yet run their calibration routine to understand where the highlight exposure cutoff should be. And that was a concern because they didn't want to assume something was specular when it wasn't. And that was because the hazcams don't have calibration targets within their field of view, while the much nicer mast cams can have the rover's calibration targets in the scene. (I might have remembered some of this wrong.)

    So if we're going to assign meaning to banding in the shadows, it might actually be wrong to blame it on the specific hardware, but on conscious exposure and post-processing choices made by the team. In the photo being discussed at the press conferences I watched, banding was due to boosting intentionally underexposed shadows a lot in post.

    Those press conferences are massively informative as far as hearing the thinking and strategies behind the camera hardware, shot selection, etc. behind the photos. So many very basic Mars photography questions being asked on forums all over the world get answered in seconds by listening to the NASA techs speak, but not a lot of people watch the conferences, they only read the highly watered-down non-technical sound bites they get in the local paper. Watching at least one of those daily press conferences is highly recommended, they repeat them every couple of hours on NASA TV, which I watch as the NASA channel on my Roku.
Sign In or Register to comment.