|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 5, 2005 14:07:06 GMT -4
So I guess humans are too complicated... we only need a narrow field of view because we can turn our heads. Right?
Why would they need to program the rover to turn it's head constantly to take in the view when they could simply give it a wider field of view? Turning the head is an extra and unnecessary step that makes moving the rover more complicated.
|
|
|
Post by martin on Jun 5, 2005 14:30:50 GMT -4
So I guess humans are too complicated... Maybe some humans. Others are quite simple, as is demonstrated in this forum. Martin
|
|
|
Post by unknown on Jun 5, 2005 14:31:41 GMT -4
LunarOrbit wrote: "So I guess humans are too complicated... we only need a narrow field of view because we can turn our heads. Right?
Why would they need to program the rover to turn it's head constantly... "
Why constantly? Spirit needed only one turn to see if there were some obstacles. In that movie we don't see any obstacles. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jun 5, 2005 15:07:01 GMT -4
No, you have completely mischaracterized the navigation hardware, software, and technical scheme for navigation and hazard avoidance. You still don't understand the difference between video and time-lapse photography. And you are hopelessly wrong in confusing a compressed PC video sequence for PR purposes with the actual imagery used by the on-board software and the control team. And you seem to think the animated photo sequence is in real-time, which is laughably absurd.
You're not out in left field. You're not even in the ballpark. You're not even near the parking lot.
The moderator asked you to discuss the topic "intelligently" or leave. You have yet to start.
|
|
|
Post by unknown on Jun 5, 2005 16:02:10 GMT -4
Hey sts60 I know the movie is not in real time but tell me:
1 - Why does not Nasa use the standard of 30 frames per second?
2 - Why does Spirit use wide-angle lens?[/color]
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jun 5, 2005 16:48:08 GMT -4
1. Because, for the third time, it's not from any kind of motion-picture (film/TV/video) camera. And there is no standard frame rate for time-lapse photography display. 2. Both rovers use cameras with various fields of view. See this page for their basic characteristics and applications.
|
|
|
Post by unknown on Jun 5, 2005 17:05:52 GMT -4
sts60 wrote:
"1. Because, for the third time, it's not from any kind of motion-picture (film/TV/video) camera. And there is no standard frame rate for time-lapse photography display".
Has not JayUtah yet invented a system to receive from 500 million kilometers 30 frames per second? And yet this is his job.
"2. Both rovers use cameras with various fields of view. See this page for their basic characteristics and applications".
Crap fields of view how we can see in the movies of Spirit. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jun 5, 2005 17:51:25 GMT -4
Not only are you wrong, yet again, in your claims, including the ones which have been corrected numerous times, you're not even coherent.
Hey, I tried to teach you something.
Goodbye, troll.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jun 5, 2005 19:04:26 GMT -4
Unknown, the problem -- as usual -- is with your expectations. They are wrong, and the universe is not required to conform to them.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Jun 5, 2005 19:05:41 GMT -4
to film the same stone from slightly different angles, Spirit had to move quickly on the left since the strange stone has gone out of the scene on the left. [/color][/quote] Be looking again. Vehicle turns at frame 60. Strange rock has not gone out of scene at left. Be paying attention to 2 rocks left of strange rock, which do not leave scene. Any child can be seeing this. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Jun 5, 2005 19:06:00 GMT -4
Has not JayUtah yet invented a system to receive from 500,000 kilometers 30 frames per second? And yet this is his job.
We have engines that can propel vehicles at far beyond the speed of sound. Why don't you have one on your car?
|
|
|
Post by unknown on Jun 6, 2005 1:16:35 GMT -4
Hey datacable,
is not your country the most powerful in the world? Why are your movies the most ugly in the world?
If you want to demonstrate your powerfull to all the world, go close to Mars and film it raising from the darkness of universe using 30 frames per second. THAT WOULD BE A MARVELLOUS AND FANTASTIC SIGHT. THAT WAY YOU WOULD DEMONSTRATE YOUR POWERFUL not with ugly movies that jerk along like films made in 1900. Go on Mars and film panorama using 30 frames per second, don't film thousands of stones, FILM PANORAMA WITHOUT WIDE-ANGLE LENS. SPIRIT LOOKS LIKE A HUMAN-EYED OSTRICH AND IT'S EASY FOR IT TO LOOK AT EVERY DIRECTION. IF YOU CAN'T DO IT, IT MEANS YOU ARE NOT ON MARS AND ALL YOUR MOVIES ARE FAKED. ;D ;D ;D
Nasa can't say today with the new hard disks that their movies are made this way not to store too many data. ;D ;D ;D
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jun 6, 2005 8:54:10 GMT -4
I've had enough of this jerk. He's clearly not here to learn anything and his posts are almost gibberish. He's just taking up space and wasting people's time. If anyone else is ready to get rid of him, you've got my vote.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jun 6, 2005 9:55:37 GMT -4
Bob B.
You're the second vote (I received one in a PM). If I get one more vote to ban unknown I will.
unknown
Perhaps you would like to explain to me why you have a problem with wide-angle lenses? In what way are they inferior to a narrow field of view?
|
|
|
Post by papageno on Jun 6, 2005 10:06:28 GMT -4
Bob B.You're the second vote (I received one in a PM). If I get one more vote to ban unknown I will. Another vote? *snaps finger* Easy! I vote to ban unknown. He is a troll.
|
|