Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 13 of 21«1211121314152021»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Known issues and bug reports - SpaceEngine 0.97 (Please post here any bugs you find in SpaceEngine)
Known issues and bug reports - SpaceEngine 0.97
HarbingerDawnDate: Wednesday, 01.05.2013, 06:26 | Message # 1
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8711
Status: Offline
Please post here all of your reports about bugs or crashes in SpaceEngine. Before you post any bugs, please follow these steps:

  • Read the Troubleshooting for SpaceEngine 0.97. It is possible that your problem can be solved there.

  • Make sure that your bugs are not on the following list of known issues. You can use your browser's word finder to help search the list.

  • If the bug is not on the list then please post it in this thread. Attach to your message a screenshot (if possible) and a log file (it's called the "se.log" and is located in the system folder of SpaceEngine's directory). Only the log file will help me to understand your problem and find a solution.



    Known Issues



    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Monday, 30.09.2013, 22:45
  •  
    smjjamesDate: Monday, 10.06.2013, 17:17 | Message # 181
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    Quote (SpaceEngineer)
    No, atmosphere is clipped by far plane. It is a different thing.
    All these issues are solved by logarithmic z-buffer, but it introduces a new issues.


    I meant the two I reported here, but ok.

    Added (10.06.2013, 20:17)
    ---------------------------------------------

    Quote (Voekoevaka)
    Then I noticed the screenshot havn't worked, so I can only describe what I saw : a white streal in the sky. It seemed to be big.


    I saw this when I turned galaxy magnitude down all the way by mistake (meant the models) and I'm noticing that they always go the same direction (or appear to go in a direction) and they are always on the galactic plane.





     
    Fireinthehole-Date: Monday, 10.06.2013, 22:36 | Message # 182
    Pioneer
    Group: Translators
    Sweden
    Messages: 365
    Status: Offline
    When visiting Sedna, the magnitude is said to be far lower (i.e brighter) than it is in reality. Observing Sedna from a distance of 5,000 kilometers the magnitude shows at -19.58, when it actually shouldn't be brighter than magnitude -10, dimmer than the full Moon as seen from Earth.




    Love Space Engine!
     
    smjjamesDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 05:25 | Message # 183
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    Fireinthehole, did you have real planet brightness on or off? I don't think that would affect the magnitude, but just wondering.

    Yeah, using real planet brightness tends to make distant things too dark and closer up things too bright and turning it off isn't perfectly realistic earlier (however, it's preferrable sometimes). I remember there was a whole discussion about real planet brightness vs what it should be months ago. Forget what thread it was in though.





     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 06:41 | Message # 184
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8711
    Status: Offline
    smjjames, RPB is irrelevant to what he was saying. And you should always have it turned off except in specific circumstances.

    As for Sedna, go into the KuiperBelt.sc catalog and comment out its AbsMagn parameter. Then change its Albedo to 0.32. That should fix the magnitude problem. For some reason the AbsMagn was causing an issue. Also, change Radius to 500, add RotationPeriod and set to 10, and add Mass and set to 1.675e-4. That should provide more realistic parameters for Sedna than exist by default.





    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM


    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 07:21
     
    smjjamesDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 06:57 | Message # 185
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    Oh, sounded like he was talking about RPB, but wasn't sure if it affected magnitude or anything, and I do keep RPB off.




     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 07:00 | Message # 186
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8711
    Status: Offline
    Quote (smjjames)
    sounded like he was talking about RPB

    He made no mention of it, he was talking about magnitude, and he even gave numbers. None of what he posted suggested he was talking about real planet brightness. What made you think that?





    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
     
    Fireinthehole-Date: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 08:24 | Message # 187
    Pioneer
    Group: Translators
    Sweden
    Messages: 365
    Status: Offline
    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    smjjames, RPB is irrelevant to what he was saying. And you should always have it turned off except in specific circumstances.

    As for Sedna, go into the KuiperBelt.sc catalog and comment out its AbsMagn parameter. Then change its Albedo to 0.32. That should fix the magnitude problem. For some reason the AbsMagn was causing an issue. Also, change Radius to 500, add RotationPeriod and set to 10, and add Mass and set to 1.675e-4. That should provide more realistic parameters for Sedna than exist by default.

    I changed that but still the magnitude shows an incorrect number. unsure

    smjjames, I think real planet brightness is more realistic, I use it all the time but it shound't affect the magnitude number. wink





    Love Space Engine!
     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:05 | Message # 188
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8711
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    I think real planet brightness is more realistic

    It is not more realistic, it is less realistic. The fact that everyone thinks that it's somehow "more realistic" and don't understand its intended use is why it is my least favorite feature of SE.

    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    I changed that but still the magnitude shows an incorrect number

    So your Sedna parameters look like this now?

    Code
        ParentBody "Sol"
      AsterType  "Centaur"
      Radius      500
      Albedo      0.32
      Color     ( 0.750 0.450 0.350 )
      // AbsMagn     1.5
      SlopeParam  0.15
      RotationPeriod 10
      Mass  1.675e-4


    Because when I made those changes the magnitude behaves properly.





    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
     
    WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:15 | Message # 189
    Galaxy Architect
    Group: Global Moderators
    United States
    Messages: 2607
    Status: Offline
    I notice that the apparent magnitude display for Sedna is independent of phase angle, unlike every body I looked at, including other dwarf planets like Eris. This is probably related to the problem at hand.

    Edit: Oh, I see what's going on. Sedna is classified as an asteroid, and for some reason all asteroids in SE have strange behavior regarding how the apparent magnitude is calculated with respect to phase angle. There is a dependency, but it's very small, and unlike planets / dwarf planets, the magnitude does not go to infinity when viewing the dark side. I'm not sure if that's relevant to what's going on with what smjjames is pointing out though.





     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:29 | Message # 190
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8711
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Watsisname)
    This is probably related to the problem at hand.

    This is seemingly caused by the AbsMagn parameter, since the apparent magnitude behaved normally after disabling it. Other objects with similar catalog entries have similar behavior. I'll make a thread with corrections at some point I think.

    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    edna is classified as an asteroid, and for some reason all asteroids in SE have strange behavior regarding how the apparent magnitude is calculated with respect to phase angle.

    No, it's not the class, it's the AbsMagn parameter.





    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM


    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:31
     
    WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:32 | Message # 191
    Galaxy Architect
    Group: Global Moderators
    United States
    Messages: 2607
    Status: Offline
    Ah, okay, thanks for clearing that for me.




     
    Fireinthehole-Date: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 16:17 | Message # 192
    Pioneer
    Group: Translators
    Sweden
    Messages: 365
    Status: Offline
    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    It is not more realistic, it is less realistic. The fact that everyone thinks that it's somehow "more realistic" and don't understand its intended use is why it is my least favorite feature of SE.

    Why is it less realistic? unsure

    And yes, now it works, thank you wink





    Love Space Engine!
     
    smjjamesDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 16:51 | Message # 193
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    It is not more realistic, it is less realistic. The fact that everyone thinks that it's somehow "more realistic" and don't understand its intended use is why it is my least favorite feature of SE.

    Why is it less realistic? unsure


    I summarized it in that it tends to make things either too dark or too bright than they should be, it also makes distant objects too dark to even see much of anything with RPB on.

    Found the whole discussion about it, starting near the bottom of page 5 of this thread. It got derailed though when Space Engineer started talking about nebulae, not that I'm complaining or anything.





     
    WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 17:11 | Message # 194
    Galaxy Architect
    Group: Global Moderators
    United States
    Messages: 2607
    Status: Offline
    One has to be clear about what Real Planet Brightness is doing. It correctly (I guess?) shows how different worlds would look to a camera at a fixed exposure setting, but it absolutely does not show how they would look to the human eye. The reason for that is because the human eye adapts very quickly to new lighting conditions and over a very wide range of light intensities.

    The only time Real Planet Brightness does a good job of showing how the eye sees things is when you're looking at two objects at very different different distances from the sun at the same time. E.g. if you look at the Moon and Saturn together from the Earth, you'll notice that Saturn has a much lower surface brightness.





     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 17:13 | Message # 195
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8711
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    Why is it less realistic?

    Read my posts starting here and continuing until the discussion ends on some later page.

    Quote (Watsisname)
    The only time Real Planet Brightness does a good job of showing how the eye sees things is when you're looking at two objects at very different different distances from the sun at the same time

    Correct. Anyway the RPB feature will become useless once a proper autoexposure feature is implemented (I doubt we'll see this in 0.98, but maybe in 0.99).





    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM


    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 17:30
     
    Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Known issues and bug reports - SpaceEngine 0.97 (Please post here any bugs you find in SpaceEngine)
    Page 13 of 21«1211121314152021»
    Search: