RUS New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 43 of 70«1241424344456970»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress - 0.9.7.2
Work progress - 0.9.7.2
FaceDeerDate: Saturday, 11.10.2014, 22:30 | Message # 631
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Canada
Messages: 117
Status: Offline
Ditto for me on number three. Having different colours for the grid lines and for the elevation lines is good, it makes it easier to distinguish them. And having the star colour restricted to just the star itself makes it a little hard to see, having it fade down the line like that makes it clearer (and also helps connect the star to the specific line it's on, too).

When zoomed farther out, as in this shot, the elevation lines become so dense that they become pretty much useless. Perhaps once there are too many stars in the shot like this you could filter out the elevation lines for dimmer stars, leaving only the more prominent bright stars with lines?
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Saturday, 11.10.2014, 22:41 | Message # 632
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4799
Status: Offline
Quote FaceDeer ()
When zoomed farther out, as in this shot, the elevation lines become so dense that they become pretty much useless. Perhaps once there are too many stars in the shot like this you could filter out the elevation lines for dimmer stars, leaving only the more prominent bright stars with lines?

It is hard to choose the function that restricts the magnitude of stars based on the map radius. It simply will not work good in every region of the galaxy. Some sort of adaptive system is needed here.





 
FastFourierTransformDate: Saturday, 11.10.2014, 23:21 | Message # 633
Pioneer
Group: Local Moderators
Spain
Messages: 542
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
It is hard to choose the function that restricts the magnitude of stars


Naaaaaa don't do that. I want to get the feeling of inmensity and oversaturated data on the screen. We are always trying to limit the information, but here we would loose the idea of numbers in the stellar neighbourhood.
What we could do is enable a lot of filters to make the search function a lot more suggestive. Filters for all types of objects, filters for star spectral classes, for anomalies on planetary systems (as life), for nebulaes, etc...
 
DeathStarDate: Sunday, 12.10.2014, 00:02 | Message # 634
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
Quote FastFourierTransform ()
Naaaaaa don't do that. I want to get the feeling of inmensity and oversaturated data on the screen. We are always trying to limit the information, but here we would loose the idea of numbers in the stellar neighbourhood.


No offense, but the whole point of the UI is to nicely display information. If you want to get a scale of everything, just set your speed to half a parsec per second and go flying around. Making the map screen oversaturated would just be annoying.
 
SalvoDate: Sunday, 12.10.2014, 10:48 | Message # 635
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Italy
Messages: 1400
Status: Offline
Love the new star map! There is an huge difference from the current one! wink

EDIT: Also, I vote for the third.





The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.

CPU: Intel Core i7 4770 GPU: ASUS Radeon R9 270 RAM: 8 GBs

(still don't know why everyone is doing this...)


Edited by Salvo - Sunday, 12.10.2014, 10:49
 
FastFourierTransformDate: Sunday, 12.10.2014, 11:06 | Message # 636
Pioneer
Group: Local Moderators
Spain
Messages: 542
Status: Offline
Quote DeathStar ()
No offense, but the whole point of the UI is to nicely display information.

Yes, I agree. I didin't explained myself with arguments xD

What I'm trying to say is that we could have filters for displaying information in the way we want. Why making dissapear the less bright stars? if I want to see the realtive positions of a group of low mass stars I want to be able to do so. Making dissapearing the less bright star wouldn't "nicely display information" as you said, it only would eliminate the possibility of knowing more things. By the way I don't think the brighter stars are the most interesting so why leaving those?
 
FaceDeerDate: Sunday, 12.10.2014, 12:12 | Message # 637
Space Pilot
Group: Users
Canada
Messages: 117
Status: Offline
Quote FastFourierTransform ()
Making dissapearing the less bright star wouldn't "nicely display information" as you said, it only would eliminate the possibility of knowing more things.


I don't think so. The situation I'm addressing is a star map like this:



There are simply too many lines for them to be meaningful any more here, they overlap each other so much that you can't follow any of them and it just becomes a glowing blue haze.

When zoomed in far enough that there's only a few dozen or a hundred stars visible, sure, one can have lines for all of them and they don't make a mess. You can see every single one. But zoom out like this and the lines become useless, or actively obstruct the view. Getting rid of the blue haze doesn't eliminate any meaningful information.

Quote FastFourierTransform ()
By the way I don't think the brighter stars are the most interesting so why leaving those?


The brighter stars are "more interesting" solely in that they can be seen more clearly from farther away. They're the most visually prominent so I proposed that if this UI was going to cull excessive lines it seemed reasonable to use that as the most obvious default means of culling. You'd get the stars marked out that are most visible from a planet at the center of the map.

If Space Engineer wanted to get fancy and add selectable filters, for example maybe putting in lines only for stars with life-bearing worlds, that would be spiffy. But the most important first step IMO is getting rid of the visual clutter of too many lines, so a simpler filter seems like a good thing to start with as a suggestion.

If one wants to see the relative positions of a group of low-mass objects, zoom in on them so that there isn't so much clutter from other objects obstructing the elevation lines. It'd be necessary to do that even without excess line culling since you won't be able to make out the elevation lines otherwise.
 
Storm026Date: Monday, 13.10.2014, 02:57 | Message # 638
Observer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 14
Status: Offline
I like the green maps! I also like the different colors for the different star classes. Your doing a great job! shame you don't have a huge team to speed things up!
 
InariusDate: Monday, 13.10.2014, 07:57 | Message # 639
Explorer
Group: Local Moderators
France
Messages: 237
Status: Offline
Quote
shame you don't have a huge team to speed things up!

Not necessarily, coding and testing is part of the fun, managing a team can be very stressfull and unfun (and many people are unable to manage a team properly), perhaps it's better for him to do it alone, you can't know !
 
SpaceEngineerDate: Wednesday, 15.10.2014, 20:29 | Message # 640
Author of Space Engine
Group: Administrators
Russian Federation
Messages: 4799
Status: Offline
Trying to make a better looking stars. This is an adaptation of Chris Laurel's dev Celestia shader. Of course, with the geometry shader based motion blur. Look at full res!





View from Solar system at 11m mag limit O.O




This shader is awesome. I still can't believe computer program could generate such beautiful stars! They are also perfectly anti-aliased - ie they do not blink when camera is slowly rotated. I also implement an experimental "stable" motion blur - the length of the trail does not depend on fps, but only on speed. Combining it all gives pretty nice result.





 
VoekoevakaDate: Wednesday, 15.10.2014, 20:42 | Message # 641
World Builder
Group: SE team
France
Messages: 1016
Status: Offline
SpaceEngine skies are now photo-réalistic ! Awesome work !




Want some music of mine ? Please go here !

 
DeathStarDate: Wednesday, 15.10.2014, 20:51 | Message # 642
Pioneer
Group: Users
Croatia
Messages: 515
Status: Offline
Wow, this is amazing! The third picture literally looks like it was taken in real life - and I am not even exaggerating!
 
anonymousgamerDate: Wednesday, 15.10.2014, 20:53 | Message # 643
World Builder
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 1011
Status: Offline
...whoa. That looks jaw dropping.




Desktop: FX-8350 4.0 GHz, 8 GB DDR3 RAM, EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW 8 GB, 2 TB HDD, 24 inch 1920x1080 screen
Laptop: Core i5 480M 2.66 GHz (turbo 2.93), 8 GB DDR3 RAM, AMD Radeon HD 6550m 1 GB, 640 GB HDD, 17.3 inch 1600x900 screen
 
spacerDate: Wednesday, 15.10.2014, 21:05 | Message # 644
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Israel
Messages: 1258
Status: Offline
omg wow! cant believe this is SE its looking too real!! surprised




"we began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still"
-carl sagan

-space engine photographer
 
DisasterpieceDate: Wednesday, 15.10.2014, 21:09 | Message # 645
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 640
Status: Offline
Quote SpaceEngineer ()
Look at full res!

I agree completely. Just another example of this great program's (and programmer's) abilities.





I play teh spase engien
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Work progress - 0.9.7.2
Page 43 of 70«1241424344456970»
Search: