From current cause: a render of the landing site of the recent NASA 
mars probe 'spirit'.

See also:

http://marsoweb.nas.nasa.gov/landingsites/


Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 25 Oct. 2003 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'mars_spirit1.jpg' (89 KB)

Preview of image 'mars_spirit1.jpg'

High!

Cool image... is the surface just a bumpmap or a real relief? If the latter,
how did you do it, with a common mesh or with your Iso_HF macro?
How long did it parse?

See you in Khyberspace!

Yadgar

Post a reply to this message

"Christoph Hormann" <chr### [at] gmxde> wrote

> From current cause: a render of the landing site of the recent NASA
> mars probe 'spirit'.

Here's one of the Spirit landed color images *before* it was "cleaned up".

Guess how POV-Ray fits into this picture? :-)

Jon

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'ColorMars.jpg' (32 KB)

Preview of image 'ColorMars.jpg'

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004 23:19:43 -0600, "Jon Berndt" <jsb### [at] hal-pcdotorg> wrote:

>Here's one of the Spirit landed color images *before* it was "cleaned up".

Nice one!

Regards
        Stephen

Post a reply to this message

The monolith fits right into this scene, just needs a few proto-humans
touching it and jumping around.

Christoph didn't mention the specific source for his elevation map but it
looks like it has real good resolution. I didn't look around too far into
the aforementioned web site.

However, I used some images from www.space-graphics.com which seem very good
too. Nice thing about the texturing image map is that it doesn't use faked
shadowing, which messes up the lighting direction. The bump map is very high
resolution, and yet I'm not sure if it rivals that of Christoph's or not
since I haven't rendered the Gusev crater region. Here's the expected
Opportunity rover landing site though. Should be slightly down and right of
center. I'm still working on the media for the dusty air because it doesn't
spread across the planet the way I'd like it too.

-- 
Bob H.
http://www.3digitaleyes.com

Post a reply to this message

Attachments:
Download 'Mars_Opportunity_Landing-Site_small.jpg' (20 KB)

Preview of image 'Mars_Opportunity_Landing-Site_small.jpg'

Hughes, B. wrote:
> The monolith fits right into this scene, just needs a few proto-humans
> touching it and jumping around.
> 
> Christoph didn't mention the specific source for his elevation map but it
> looks like it has real good resolution. I didn't look around too far into
> the aforementioned web site.

http://wufs.wustl.edu/missions/mgs/mola/megdr.html

The complete planet data is nearly 2 GB.

> However, I used some images from www.space-graphics.com which seem very good
> too. Nice thing about the texturing image map is that it doesn't use faked
> shadowing, which messes up the lighting direction. The bump map is very high
> resolution, and yet I'm not sure if it rivals that of Christoph's or not
> since I haven't rendered the Gusev crater region. Here's the expected
> Opportunity rover landing site though. Should be slightly down and right of
> center. I'm still working on the media for the dusty air because it doesn't
> spread across the planet the way I'd like it too.

The elevation map is probably lower resolution but the image maps look 
very nice (especially the 'flat' one on 
http://www.space-graphics.com/redmars_v3.htm) - i was not able to find 
any high resolution images without shading when i did my first renders.

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 11 Jan. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message

Christoph Hormann wrote:
> 
>  From current cause: a render of the landing site of the recent NASA
> mars probe 'spirit'.
> 
Cool image. The atmosphere is IMO too big and strong but artistic reasons 
justify the exageration. The flat angle of light definitely rocks. 

I'm rendering landing sites as well currently, but Christoph was 
faster, as always :)

Just a question: 
Spirit is located at 14.59 S, 175.30 E (IAU 2000)
Is my assumption correct that we're in the tile megt00n090.. ?
(I just want to be sure, there seem to be different zero longitude 
definitions around...)

Wolfgang

Post a reply to this message

"Wolfgang Wieser" <wwi### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:40118be9@news.povray.org...
>
> I'm rendering landing sites as well currently, but Christoph was
> faster, as always :)
>
> Just a question:
> Spirit is located at 14.59 S, 175.30 E (IAU 2000)
> Is my assumption correct that we're in the tile megt00n090.. ?
> (I just want to be sure, there seem to be different zero longitude
> definitions around...)

Yes, that's the one. "000" for longitudes 000 to 090, "090" for 090 to 180,
"180" for 180 to 270, lastly "270" for 270 to 360. Apparently only files
needed are the megt*.img ones too.

What confused me at first was how the megt00n000hb.img to megt00n270hb.img
tiles are really for the southern hemisphere too. As you might have already
discovered, it goes southward from 00*n* to 44s and for northward is 44n to
88n. Oh, and watch out for those missing 2 degrees at the poles. I finally
worked that out for a orthographic rendering which pieces all the tiles
together for a spherical image map I used afterward. Polar tiles were
shifted up or down by about 6% of a unit, for my unit-sized tiles which are
30 X 30 degrees each.

I'm using 3DEM, http://www.visualizationsoftware.com/3dem/downloads.html ,
to convert those IMG files to bitmaps and it's both free and very good at
manipulating or displaying them.

P.S.
Something strange about the Mars image/bump maps I got from
www.space-graphics.com was that I needed to rotate a little to align with
POV's map_type 1, 'rotate (+80.88-175.2)*y', or else it was offset from the
wrapped ends. Using the start/end wrapping point to judge where the planet
surface features are when the camera is directly along -z (or +x if not
rotating away from the 0 degree longitudinal line) it makes it a little
tricky if that line isn't at zero.

Bob H.

Post a reply to this message

Hughes, B. wrote:

> Yes, that's the one. "000" for longitudes 000 to 090, "090" for 090 to
> 180, "180" for 180 to 270, lastly "270" for 270 to 360. Apparently only
> files needed are the megt*.img ones too.
> 
> What confused me at first was how the megt00n000hb.img to megt00n270hb.img
> tiles are really for the southern hemisphere too. As you might have
> already discovered, it goes southward from 00*n* to 44s and for northward
> is 44n to 88n. Oh, and watch out for those missing 2 degrees at the poles.
> I finally worked that out for a orthographic rendering which pieces all
> the tiles together for a spherical image map I used afterward. Polar tiles
> were shifted up or down by about 6% of a unit, for my unit-sized tiles
> which are 30 X 30 degrees each.
> 
> I'm using 3DEM, http://www.visualizationsoftware.com/3dem/downloads.html ,
> to convert those IMG files to bitmaps and it's both free and very good at
> manipulating or displaying them.
> 
There is no problem with the interpretion of the tiles and their formats. 
I have been using a self-written program to convert the 4x4 tile map 
row-by-row into two full-sized and scaled-down grayscale PNGs. 
See: http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~wwieser/render/img/mars/

It's just that I got a bit confused about the coordinate system on 

(NASA) so I was not sure if everybody was using the same zero 
meridian. But from searching the net and comparing the names of the 
locations (Isidis Planitia, etc) to pixel locations on the spherical 
projections, I now think I can correctly locate the landing sites on 
the map. 

> P.S.
> Something strange about the Mars image/bump maps I got from
> www.space-graphics.com was that I needed to rotate a little to align with
> POV's map_type 1, 'rotate (+80.88-175.2)*y', or else it was offset from
> the wrapped ends. Using the start/end wrapping point to judge where the
> planet surface features are when the camera is directly along -z (or +x if
> not rotating away from the 0 degree longitudinal line) it makes it a
> little tricky if that line isn't at zero.
> 
I did not come across that problem. I measured several outstanding points 
(in maris vallineris, a volcano) and the topo map matches the color map. 

The yellow-blue image map I was using before needed such hand-tweaking 
but not the current one. 

Wolfgang

Post a reply to this message

"Wolfgang Wieser" <wwi### [at] gmxde> wrote in message
news:40127b1e@news.povray.org...
 >
> There is no problem with the interpretion of the tiles and their formats.
> I have been using a self-written program to convert the 4x4 tile map
> row-by-row into two full-sized and scaled-down grayscale PNGs.
> See: http://www.cip.physik.uni-muenchen.de/~wwieser/render/img/mars/
>
> It's just that I got a bit confused about the coordinate system on

> (NASA) so I was not sure if everybody was using the same zero
> meridian. But from searching the net and comparing the names of the
> locations (Isidis Planitia, etc) to pixel locations on the spherical
> projections, I now think I can correctly locate the landing sites on
> the map.

Yeah, I noticed ESA and NASA seemed to be switching it around. You have a
great web page about rendering Mars with POV-Ray. Does your custom
conversion have more than 8 bits for elevation? I searched around but the
grayscale maps or other elevation maps I find don't seem to say much about
it.

Bob H.

Post a reply to this message