 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
more than just raw guts now
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'jupsat.jpg' (193 KB)
Preview of image 'jupsat.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
alphaQuad nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/04/06 21:55:
> more than just raw guts now
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Nice, but the straight, sharp edge of the "milky way" is bothering me. It should
be prety irregular, more gradual, somewhat fluffy.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall
become as corrupt as Europe.
Thomas Jefferson
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain <ele### [at] netscape net> wrote:
> alphaQuad nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2008/04/06 21:55:
> > more than just raw guts now
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> Nice, but the straight, sharp edge of the "milky way" is bothering me. It should
> be prety irregular, more gradual, somewhat fluffy.
>
> --
> Alain
> -------------------------------------------------
> When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall
> become as corrupt as Europe.
> Thomas Jefferson
Had much difficulty with the text, basically if I stayed away from transform
matrix and rotated a ra and dec, it was much better. But close up on 200 km
rocks with large translations, it was either gone or blurred, settled for
readable blur.
Done:
Set cam view by object name
Access multiple catalog arrays incrementally
Select percent flare and glow stars
Fix Milky way-basically the map has a hard line. Layered out some darker colors;
75 out of 255 in PSP layer properties
The only thing that seems to be wrong with atmosphere now is that it might take
days to render one.
Wonder what might happen if someone with more pov experience than I jumped on
this.
Colors are very faded from jpg compression here. I am seeing more color than
this.
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'planetarium3.jpg' (164 KB)
Preview of image 'planetarium3.jpg'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
-22d 48.33m
Dec: -21.81
??????????????????????
no one noticed?
First thought it was the round func, but doing this fixed it. (round() was not
used)
Floor rounds up?
#local dm = concat(str(floor(dec),0,0),"d ",
str(round(abs(mod(dec,1.0))*60,2),0,2),"m");
fix: floor(dec-mod(dec,1.0))
#local dm = concat(str(floor(dec-mod(dec,1.0)),0,0),"d ",
str(round(abs(mod(dec,1.0))*60,2),0,2),"m");
Not according to help:
floor(A) Floor of A. Returns the largest integer less than A. Rounds down to the
next lower integer.
Bizzare, but just proven, something perhaps to consider with use of floor().
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
While I am deeply impressed by your planetarium work, it goes way beyond my
capabilities, the one thing that hurts my eyes is the Milky Way map.
Supposing that it is not necessary to reproduce it faithfully, wouldn't an
emitive media give much nicer results? I suppose this would be contained
inside a (flat) torus. Just my 2 cents...
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> more than just raw guts now
Did you look at Stellarium before? It might be good for reference (it's
open source) and I use it a lot.
http://www.stellarium.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Thomas de Groot" <t.d### [at] internlDOTnet> wrote:
> While I am deeply impressed by your planetarium work, it goes way beyond my
> capabilities, the one thing that hurts my eyes is the Milky Way map.
> Supposing that it is not necessary to reproduce it faithfully, wouldn't an
> emitive media give much nicer results? I suppose this would be contained
> inside a (flat) torus. Just my 2 cents...
>
> Thomas
I've seen "2 cents" that was worth millions.
If you dont go atmo or fancy stars, the render time is about 1.5 minutes.
Short render time probably important for a planetarium.
Turn on media and rendering hits a brick wall of time.
The milkyWay map would have to be around 8192 pixels before graniness would get
better. 4 times what it is.
But some really knowledged person migh have methods and ways, I dont know.
If anyone wants to work on it, suggestion; request latest work. Any previous
work posted was just data core.
Beyond capabilities? No way. After comprehending what a cross product was, I was
3/4 the way there in doing something like this. Knowing your way around a
triangle in the dark is helpful (triangulation.inc). Then you need like 4 or 5
functions which I posted. By the third try, your comprehension should rocket.
Just my 2 cents...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"scott" <sco### [at] laptopcom> wrote:
> > more than just raw guts now
>
> Did you look at Stellarium before? It might be good for reference (it's
> open source) and I use it a lot.
>
> http://www.stellarium.org/
No, I found the main stuff like invertmatrix and Kepler in opensource "open
universe". But only the ...adjective-not-found... ones could get it running for
the guy never bothered to add the glut32.dll. I have it running with tons of new
code.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> schreef in bericht
news:web.47fca845115632e3ac60c46d0@news.povray.org...
> I've seen "2 cents" that was worth millions.
<grin> well, mine are just what they are :-)
> If you dont go atmo or fancy stars, the render time is about 1.5 minutes.
> Short render time probably important for a planetarium.
Yes, I agree.
> Turn on media and rendering hits a brick wall of time.
>
> The milkyWay map would have to be around 8192 pixels before graniness
> would get
> better. 4 times what it is.
>
> But some really knowledged person migh have methods and ways, I dont know.
> If anyone wants to work on it, suggestion; request latest work. Any
> previous
> work posted was just data core.
I need to think this over a bit more....
> Beyond capabilities? No way. After comprehending what a cross product was,
> I was
> 3/4 the way there in doing something like this. Knowing your way around a
> triangle in the dark is helpful (triangulation.inc). Then you need like 4
> or 5
> functions which I posted. By the third try, your comprehension should
> rocket.
> Just my 2 cents...
<grin again> well, don't overestimate my capabilities :-)
Thomas
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> -22d 48.33m
> Dec: -21.81
> Floor rounds up?
> fix: floor(dec-mod(dec,1.0))
> floor(A) Floor of A. Returns the largest integer less than A. Rounds down to the
> next lower integer.
Including down for negative numbers then,
Modulus gives a negative remainder and adds it, for same as positive value.
My round function rounds up for negative values and down for positive,
but floor rounds down for negative numbers it seems to me. So no floor does NOT
round up in ANY case, heh.
Just thought that was needed, since no one noticed.
Nuthin worse than expecting greatness and getting, WTH?
The word round should be nowhere near the floor description. It should be just
the integer, pos or neg, IMO.
Another logic hurdle melts.
abs(negative) must equal positive. where floor() can get in the way of such
logic.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
