67437ec0c8194

Page: « 1 [2] 3 4 »
67437ec0c9888
3 Guests are here.
 

Topic: realistic hires space
Page: « 1 [2] 3 4 »
Read 12341 times  

67437ec0ca042miracle.flame

67437ec0ca0a2
First thing's first - north.png has to be renamed to stationn.png

Vurt's pngs are twice the resolution RM... and the difference is really markable when you zoom up the stars, they get too big and blurred... also the corners of the skybox are clearly visible, black needs to be more black. Otherwise it is moving forward to its perfection. Is there actually any place where the sun side could be seen?

67437ec0ca1f5voodoo47

67437ec0ca23f
can't check from work, but I had the same problem with the first version as well - the textures were not fitting together seamlessly. this is something that needs to be corrected.

have you tried to load the textures into Shocked? just get the map from the first post, throw it into some mod folder together with the textures (they need to be under FAM\skyhw\), and load the map via Shocked, you should see the new textures. do make sure to run the editor in some decent resolution and in the hw mode.
« Last Edit: 07. October 2014, 12:02:06 by voodoo47 »

67437ec0ca63cRocketMan

67437ec0ca692
oops about the north.  I missed that one.

I didn't realize the black wasn't black enough.  Maybe I can lower the brightness of the entire image until I get 0,0,0 in the black areas?

I tried to fix the seams a little but it can never be perfect due to the issue I raised earlier.  The FOV is fisheyed necessarily because you're looking at the surface of a sphere.  This makes straight lines become curves.  When you try to stitch the end of one curve to another on a pair of orthogonal planes, it will look bent.  If I were drawing these textures artistically, I could just fix it the way I want but because this is a real star field with accurate constellations and everything (check, you can find the big dipper), it's going to be a little messed up that way.  I am open to suggestions but I'm unaware of any way to fix it.

Resolution - I don't have any way to arbitrarily pick the resolution of my image export.  It defaults to screen resolution, which for me is 1280x1024 (actually a bit less because of the active starfield window area).  Again, I'm open to suggestions but I have looked in the software and can't figure out any way to raise the resolution.

The sun is on the bottom panel I seem to recall.

I know it sounds like I'm giving too many excuses for this to be worth it so I'll check it out and if it does suck I guess I'll give up.  I think it was worth the effort to try but I'm really not equipped to do this myself at this point.  I lack the skills.
« Last Edit: 07. October 2014, 13:59:28 by RocketMan »
67437ec0ca7db
Which software are you using, that limits image export size to desktop size?

67437ec0ca890RocketMan

67437ec0ca8db
Starry Night.  It has a function called "export image" where you can pick your file type and compression but not the size.  It just grabs a frame from the screen.  It uses OpenGL.

67437ec0ca97avoodoo47

67437ec0ca9c3
ok, just checked, moon looking good, but I'd still recommend flipping the earth, and the seams need to be taken care of.

67437ec0caaf9miracle.flame

67437ec0cab43
I forgot to mention that the Earth is way too oversaturated, I'd suggest to lower it a bit.

EDIT:

Well Starry Night can be limited way to get really high-res screens. Maybe a google search could bring up more useful results.. Here's what I've found so far... and maybe I try to lay my hands on this myself tommorow...

http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003500/a003571/SeaIceNPwStarfield_3840x2160.1447.jpg
http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a000000/a003500/a003525/Sea_Ice_Poster_star_lg.1218.jpg (beware ZB 18000 × 13500 pic of starfield)
« Last Edit: 07. October 2014, 19:24:15 by miracle.freak »

67437ec0cabe9RocketMan

67437ec0cac32
If that's an actual view of space from Earth's perspective and you can specify which part of the sky is being examined, then it looks like my google sucks but that'd be good to have. 

67437ec0cadccRocketMan

67437ec0cae18
No, can't say I have.  It looks like it holds promise.  I'll have to see if it allows greater flexibility with taking screenshots.  Thanks for the link :thumb:
67437ec0caefb
Yeah, don't know about that, but I read about it recently and thought it might interest you.

67437ec0cb1efGrosnus

67437ec0cb24c
I really liked the idea of more realistic skybox mod, couldn't resist making one myself.
Not sure if it's any better or worse compared to other skyboxes presented here:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13017979/skyscreen1.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13017979/skyscreen2.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13017979/skyscreen3.jpg

Unfortunately unlike RocketMan's skybox, stars in my texture are completely random as the whole thing was composed of various photos and there was no way I could pull that off here.

The file was too large for attachment: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13017979/GSkybox1.zip

Edit: oops I just realised I accidentally put RMan texture as skyt.png but it can be easily replaced by stationt.png.
« Last Edit: 19. October 2014, 22:40:38 by Kolya »

67437ec0cb351voodoo47

67437ec0cb3a1
you are missing the atmosphere (bluish outer glow). also, there is a bit of ugly jagginess going on with this particular earth picture (on the right side), it could use a bit of manual tweaking if you want to go with this one. apart from from that, looking good.

also, I'll be splitting this and moving it into engineering in a moment.

67437ec0cb47eGrosnus

67437ec0cb4cc
I believe in real Earth photos you can't really see the atmosphere from this distance, take a look at apollo 17 pictures for instance.
(I know it's sort of doesn't make sense cause you also wouldn't be able to see the Milky Way the way it is, but...) And yeah there's a little bit of a lower quality happening on the right side, but you have to keep in mind that this particular photo doesn't feature fully illuminated Earth, but I agree that the shadow looks weird.

67437ec0cb577voodoo47

67437ec0cb5c4
this is movie realism - sounds in vacuum, space full of stars and nebulai (plural alert), halos and glows. reality is dull, that's why we have movies and games (and rule 34) in the first place.

67437ec0cb76cvoodoo47

67437ec0cb7b9
that particular part is somewhat interesting/pretty, but mostly it's just dots on a black background. for the naked eye, that is.

67437ec0cb92aRocketMan

67437ec0cb97a
I like Grosnus' version.  It's believable, it has the Milky Way in it.  It's not 100% accurate but actually I never really cared about that because I'm not going to check to see where all the constellations are.  I just want something that I can look at for 2 seconds and feel that it makes sense and his pulls that off IMO.  Good work Grosnus :)

My 2 cents:  Put the sun completely opposite the Earth so it makes sense that you can see the entire illuminated disc of the Earth (oops you've already done that).  Put the moon somewhere with appropriate disc illumination.  For Tau Ceti view, just delete the sun (or you could move it since Tau Ceti does have a very similar sun actually) and moon.

Voodoo:  Good call splitting the thread.  I cluttered up Vurt's unintentionally.

The awesome thing about being in space (one of the reasons I hope to go one day) is that there's no light pollution and no atmospheric aberrations so you can see pretty much everything clearly.  It looks a lot nicer than you could ever hope for on Earth.  Time exposure shots are about as close as we can get to seeing everything there is to see but there's nothing quite like being there in person :)
« Last Edit: 08. October 2014, 21:46:31 by RocketMan »
67437ec0cc016
The awesome thing about being in space (one of the reasons I hope to go one day) is that there's no light pollution and no atmospheric aberrations so you can see pretty much everything clearly.  It looks a lot nicer than you could ever hope for on Earth.  Time exposure shots are about as close as we can get to seeing everything there is to see but there's nothing quite like being there in person :)
Or you just digitalisize your mind and hack yourself into hubble.
67437ec0cc124
And use it's lenses to paint crop symbols onto earth's surface.  :awesome:
[episode-9-nasca-lines.jpg expired]

67437ec0cc5b5miracle.flame

67437ec0cc613
Well Grosnus, your Skybox solved the nebulai and crazy stuff but the Earth is as small as Vurts. It would be so great to expand the Earth beyond single picture and render the skybox textures to make round impression when viewed from station. I have found this supposedly noob Blender tutorial with pre-scripted template to achieve that freely but I apparently suck at following those tutorials in the end.

67437ec0cc6ceRocketMan

67437ec0cc727
If the East view were to be filled entirely by the Earth, are there any other places on the station where you can see other views with stars?

67437ec0cc7d2voodoo47

67437ec0cc990
not on station, no. also, you don't really want to deal with the earth stretching through several textures unless you really know you way around skyboxes, or so I've heard.
3 Guests are here.
We’ve answered 315,930 questions. We can answer yours, too.
Page: « 1 [2] 3 4 »
Contact SMF 2.0.19 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines | Terms and Policies
FEEP
67437ec0cfba0