Phase II quality of pictures

Post here if you are having any kind of problem with the Stardust@home website.

Moderators: Stardust@home Team, DustMods

Post Reply
dirlik
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 12:28 am
Location: France

Phase II quality of pictures

Post by dirlik »

Hi.

I have the impression that in phase 2, the pictures are not so precise as in phase one.

they look "blury"

solaris
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 9:22 am
Location: Ontario, Canada

Post by solaris »

I am encountering an unusual amount of bad focus movies - not slightly blurry, but seriously out of focus.

Roy Ezell
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:11 am
Location: Ruskin,Florida.USA

Post by Roy Ezell »

Yea, I found lots of out of focus and very dark images also,So add one more to the list.
It kind of reminds me of blowing up a small image and you get the pixalation effect,Like there is not enough to fill the screen and the computer is filling in the blanks to make up for it.
The lens on the camera also need cleaning as even more spots have shown up,one real big spot on the left hand side about 1/3 the way up from the bottom,when you focus down it's about 1/4" wide blur and can cover something we may need to see.

G0Dfather
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 1:02 pm
Contact:

Post by G0Dfather »

my first thought was also, that the quality of the phase II pictures aren't that impressive. no real step forwards.

farpung
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:01 am
Location: Quebec

Finding the surfacein Phase II

Post by farpung »

There is also the problem that there will, on average, only be about 1/4 the dust/surface features in each movie compared to phase I, so there are likely to be more movies with no surface features to tell us whether the focus is correct or not. I ahve noticed a lot of movies that are almost completely blank. They may be focussed correctly, but I cannot tell if the surface comes into focus or not.

I was wondering if some easily recognisable tiny particles (would bucky balls or carbon nontubes big enough?) could ahve been sprinkled on the surface to aid (a) the microscopes autofocussing and (b) our dusting work. I guess it goes against the grain to deliberately pollute the collector, but I think that it might actually have helped.

DustBuster
DustMod
Posts: 694
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 8:12 pm
Location: Horsetown, USA

Re: Finding the surfacein Phase II

Post by DustBuster »

farpung wrote:I was wondering if some easily recognisable tiny particles (would bucky balls or carbon nontubes big enough?) could ahve been sprinkled on the surface to aid (a) the microscopes autofocussing and (b) our dusting work. I guess it goes against the grain to deliberately pollute the collector, but I think that it might actually have helped.
You know, farpung, you may be on to something... you're right about not wanting to pollute or disturb the collector- maybe a laser that could give a point of reference or even map a section to be scanned and relay the surface height adjustments to the microscope?

I have a nagging notion that the scope must first set and average starting distance before it scans a specific area, so even if you could indicate uneven surface features the scope would not be able to make adjustments on the fly- but I'm not the expert... can we get an expert?

Domelsmith
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 1:53 pm
Location: Temple, Texas

Post by Domelsmith »

I have had similar reactions to the "new", higher resolution movies--a larger proportion where I can't bring any surface feature into focus. In Phase I I tagged these as "Bad Focus", thinking that was a conservative answer. Could one of the pro's advise us? Would it be better for The Project for us to tag a movie as "Bad Focus" or "No Track" if we can't see any surface features to focus on?
Thank you.

bmendez
Stardust@home Team
Stardust@home Team
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2006 11:28 am
Location: UC Berkeley Space Sciences Lab
Contact:

Post by bmendez »

Domelsmith wrote:I have had similar reactions to the "new", higher resolution movies--a larger proportion where I can't bring any surface feature into focus. In Phase I I tagged these as "Bad Focus", thinking that was a conservative answer. Could one of the pro's advise us? Would it be better for The Project for us to tag a movie as "Bad Focus" or "No Track" if we can't see any surface features to focus on?
Thank you.
I would say, that if you cannot clearly locate the surface in a movie that you should mark it as "Bad Focus."

-Bryan
"I am made from the dust of the stars, and the oceans flow in my veins"
- RUSH

Post Reply