"I think I've found a track, what do you think?"

[dannyhcox]

Movie 5157053V1 has what appear to be at least 2 or three track marks.

One is fairly large to right, one is about 50% that of the larger mark and is to the left of the main mark, and then there is this rather odd little streak that appears below the main mark (about half way between bottom and te main mark).
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =5157053V1

Please let me know what you think!


Thanks,

Danny

[fjgiie]

Hi dannyhcox,

Just my guess now

6953762V1 is clear. (like a clear calibration movie)

6134785V1 there is a crease bottom right that does not look like anything.

5157053V1 looks the best of these three, I do not know about those two places.

Thanks,

fjgiie

[the moon]

Hi dannyhcox,

Just my guess now

6953762V1 is clear. (like a clear calibration movie)

6134785V1 there is a crease bottom right that does not look like anything.

5157053V1 looks the best of these three, I do not know about those two places.

Thanks,

fjgiie

Yeah nothing in 6953762V1, not even sure what you were looking at. Nothing that can be close to being a possible track.

6134785V1 is an inclusion, but for someone that just started, it is a good find. It's the kind of thing you should be looking for. It takes a lot of experience before you can tell the difference between inclusions and small tracks. They even fool the stardust team, most of the movies they've viewed and have passed the first cut as possible IS tracks are in fact inclusions.

5157053V1 has a slanted surface, the right side's surface is barely coming into focus by the bottom bar. I might even mark it bad focus. I don't see anything under the surface though.

[OriNebula]

Question for themoon .... why do you say the thing in 6134785V1 is inclusion? I'm trying to figure out how to tell the difference and would have likely marked that as a track.

Beth

[the moon]

Ah I knew someone would ask that. Ok you made me dig up my old inclusions rules.

Here's how I deal with inclusions. I do click some of them because I believe that smaller tracks will look exactly the same as some of these things the team is labeling as inclusions. If you could zoom in further you would see they aren't in fact solid dots but bubbles. But of course most would still be dots because they are inclusions, I'm just saying some might not be.

So here's my criteria for when I click on dots that appear below the surface.
1. If there's more then one object below the surface and they look kind of the same, I don't click, because tracks are so rare you can assume they won't come in pairs.
2. If the object comes into focus below the surface and then goes back out of focus even further down, I don't click. Unless there is a low angle track leading to it.
3. If the object is very deep, like if the surface is at the top bar and it doesn't appear until the last bar or two, with no sign of it any higher up, I don't click.
4. If it passes all those tests, I have a winner. This includes objects that haven't come into focus yet by the lowest frame, but are obviously under the surface.

That was a while ago, since then I've made rule 3 even stricter since I learned that, contrary to what the calibration movies look like, real tracks will be clearly visable 2-3 bars below the surface. Look at the first 2 examples from the tutorial to see what I mean. Those are the only 2 real pictures of tracks ever released. In all calibration movies the tracks are cut and pasted in, often at the wrong depth.

Anyway the dot in 6134785V1 doesn't pass any of the 3 tests. The other dots from rule 1 are there, 2 of them, but they're very small and faint in the last focus bar.

[dbrodin]

1. If there's more then one object below the surface and they look kind of the same, I don't click, because tracks are so rare you can assume they won't come in pairs.
2. If the object comes into focus below the surface and then goes back out of focus even further down, I don't click. Unless there is a low angle track leading to it.
3. If the object is very deep, like if the surface is at the top bar and it doesn't appear until the last bar or two, with no sign of it any higher up, I don't click.

Very sound rules. I have one of my own to add, shape test. By their nature tracks are going to be round, oblong, or posibbly pear shaped. Pointy corners are unlikely. 6134785V1 has rather pointy ends. Sometimes hard to tell on a really small object.

[xxxxxy]

What about movie 5262416V1?


http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =5262416V1

[DustBuster]

What about movie 5262416V1?


http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =5262416V1

That looks promising!
Too bad there are not 2 or 3 more frames at the bottom of the scale.

[fjgiie]

Movie 5262416

Bottom right quarter - that is the best track that I have seen.
It shows up right below the surface like I thought a track would.

Bojan, were you first to mark?

[xxxxxy]

No, it has 134 agreements.

[the moon]

No track, don't ask me why, it's hard to explain. Good find though, you should mark it, I would have marked it too. That makes sense right?

[xxxxxy]

We would see. It is so low resolution and we don`t have any other equipment. So we can just guess .

However, how long do you thing, we will have to wait to see first real track? And same question for Stardust Team. Now we are wainting nearly 6 months. And when we will have first particle, I think searching would be a lot easier because we will finally know what we are searching for.

[fjgiie]

Hey the moon and xxxxxy,

Movie 5262416 only has two things wrong with it. The center of the track is too light and the focus does not go deep enough. Other than that, the size is right, it's just below the surface, it's the correct color and contrast. It's cut pretty clean, shaped right and the best track, or possible track that I've seen yet.
Of all movies, why did this one have to be so shallow?

[edit] This one has a light center. [/edit] fjgiie

[ClipAway]

Being fairly new, I came across this one and thought it might be a candidate for a long track .. lower right to the left of the crease and right of the finger. Thoughts?

Thanks, Gene

[fjgiie]

Here is the link to that movie:
http://stardustathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/ ... =8076898V1

I would guess no track. The lower right corner never goes below the surface. Is it close to the glove? or nearer the rocks.