SUGGEST POI

Welcome to Discussion

Join the Mission Juno virtual imaging team by helping us to identify what images to capture with JunoCam now that we're at Jupiter! 

At each perijove pass, we'll ask you to start voting on which POIs you're most interested in. In the meantime, please participate in the general conversation, comment on POIs identified by the community, or suggest a new feature that hasn't yet been discussed yet.

Explore the map below

Click on POIs in the map or browse the POI list for details and discussion threads!

Notes about cylindrical maps and perijove passes

We create cylindrical maps from the telescopic images supplied by our amateur astronomers, and we update them every 2 weeks. Jupiter has a dynamic atmosphere where winds in the belts (brown) and zones (white) go in opposite directions. Storms develop and evolve, and other atmospheric features come and go. With each new map, we move all of the POI markers — sometimes POIs disappear, sometimes they get torn apart.

In its 53 day orbit, Juno spends most of the time distant from Jupiter. The spacecraft swoops from the north to the south pole in just 2 hours, which we call a "perijove pass". That means that the images JunoCam can take are restricted to a swath of longitude – we will not be able to select from all the points of interest every orbit. On the Voting page we will say which POI's are likely to be within our field of view on a given perijove pass and you will participate in the selection of which POI's to image.

We will have a conversation on every perijove pass about which POIs to image, and the debate will be based on the threads of discussion associated with those POIs. 

General Comments

If you'd like to share commentary on Jupiter's atmosphere that is not related to a specific Point of Interest, please contribute below.

229 Comments

Sign Up or Login to Comment
  1. comment by rodv92 on 2017-05-31 21:08 UT

    A 3D model of the jovian atmosphere (cloudscape ?)

    Hi. I wonder if it is possible (more "when" than "if") to give an approximate 3D reconstruction of the jovian atmosphere using JIRAM,UWS and MWR.

    Basically combining colorimetric/imaging data and radio data to give an approximate density map of the turbidity,color of the clouds and atmospheric haze. stereoscopy with all instruments cloud also aid in the differenciation of overlapping layers.

    While i am no expert, a good POC for the process could be done using the media (for cloud scattering) feature of POV-ray software and density files.

    The render times would be absurdly long however on a privately owned computer....

    A fast render using JNCE_2017033_04C00107_V01-mapprojected.png as basis for a cloud map can give a fast idea

    FLAGBACK TO TOP
  2. comment by EricDahlstrom on 2017-05-29 22:49 UT

    What is the scale??

    I was just looking for basic info to make some estimates of the physical size of some of the features in the images, and I am not finding anything to help with this question. In the metadata I see the distance from Jupiter is recorded, but what is the width of the camera field of view? I will keep digging.

    The *size* of Jupiter is its most astounding feature. Why are you not communicating the scale of the features in these images? (Reminds me of.. 'Look at my photo of the Grand Canyon.. the depth is estimated to be greater than 10 feet') :-)

    FLAGBACK TO TOP
  3. comment by Merv on 2017-05-26 19:18 UT
    in reply to : Yakage-67's comment on 2017-05-24 16:21 UT

    Adobe Photoshop is $125/yr

    NumpySci Python image processing is free!

    The GIMP is free!

    FLAGBACK TO TOP
  4. comment by Yakage-67 on 2017-05-24 16:21 UT

    Judging by what I've read in a few articles online, there's no way that the average member of the public is going to be able to produce decent-looking pictures from the Junocam images. The images that the NASA/JPL folks keep on proudly displaying in the community-contributed section just aren't possible without access to really high-end processing software.

    Just for the sake of it, I looked at the software package that a contributor had mentioned in their online article about a popular image. Unless you can afford a software package that retails for a little over US$7000, then you're just not going to be able to produce a decent quality image.

    FLAGBACK TO TOP
Show More
Read All Comments