Celestia Forums

chris wrote:Which spacecraft do we think need to be included? I mentioned a few obvious ones: Cassini, Galileo, Voyager 1 and 2, Pioneers 10 and 11. What else? Apollo 11 might be neat if we could get trajectories for it.--Chris

Hello Chris, maybe must we search first for the historical ones, Sputnik 1, 2, Vostok 1, Explorer 1, Mercury, etc...
Jeam

Jeam Tag wrote:

chris wrote:Which spacecraft do we think need to be included? I mentioned a few obvious ones: Cassini, Galileo, Voyager 1 and 2, Pioneers 10 and 11. What else? Apollo 11 might be neat if we could get trajectories for it.--Chris

Hello Chris, maybe must we search first for the historical ones, Sputnik 1, 2, Vostok 1, Explorer 1, , etc...
Jeam

I agree with Jeam Tag, for educational purposes it's important to have the milestones in space conquest, as given from Jeam Tag, adding at least Gemini, Apollo, Soyuz, Mariner, Pioneer, Voyager, Viking, etc.
Regarding a global vision of a Hi-Res Celestia spacecraft, what about producing "dedicated" packages?
I mean:
Spacecraft- Default:
Sputnik 1- Vostok 1- Apollo- Mariner- Venera Viking- Mir- Giotto- HST- Shuttle- Cassini- (in this package all the "first ones", I know many are missing here)
Spacecraft- Extra 1:
Sputnik 2- Explorer 1- Mercury- Soyuz- Gemini-Pioneer 10 and 11- Voyager 1 and 2 (here the most important)
Spacecraft Extra 2:
Galileo- and so on

In this way Celestians could download the package (or packages) of interest, IMHO.
Bye

Andrea

ANDREA wrote:In this way Celestians could download the package (or packages) of interest, IMHO.
Bye

Andrea

Sorry, I don't agree here. This is just another "addon" approch and can already be done using the Motherlode or other sites, with the current version of Celestia. I don't think it's a good idea to make various dedicated versions of Celestia. Only a single "high resolution" package is asked here.

The problem is to agree about what should be included. What models in particular, at which resolution ? Maybe it's a good idea to propose a total size on HD as a constraint ? How "big" should be that Hires Celestia ?

I advocate a CD size content, of about 500 MB (total), maybe in several zipped files to facilitate download. I advocate all textures (planets, moons) to be 2k and 4k of resolution. I advocate also to include ALL available spacecraft and probes (no SF, of course).

I also advocate a much improved database of asteroids and comets, and some popular nebulae (Orion, Helix, M57 ring, and few others).

Cham wrote:

ANDREA wrote:In this way Celestians could download the package (or packages) of interest, IMHO.
Bye Andrea

Sorry, I don't agree here. This is just another "addon" approch and can already be done using the Motherlode or other sites, with the current version of Celestia. I don't think it's a good idea to make various dedicated versions of Celestia. Only a single "high resolution" package is asked here. The problem is to agree about what should be included. What models in particular, at which resolution ? Maybe it's a good idea to propose a total size on HD as a constraint ? How "big" should be that Hires Celestia ?

Cham, you have your ideas and I have mine, but here we are speaking about what can be OK for ALL, or most, Celestians.
This goal is obviously impossible to be scored.
I think that the actual Default Celestia Installation Package has the positive effect to avoid to lazy people (many here, IMHO, sorry) the exertion to choose, to download, to install, to check, and to decide if that is OK or not, and so on.
But having a well tailored Hirer-Res Default Celestia Package, containing all 2k or 4k planets and moons, the milestones of Space Conquest (not so many, anyhow), and some universe wonders, could tempt many people to download and install further packages or stuff.
I agree with Fridger, actual Default Celestia is like a Ferrari car running on a straight street with a 60 MPH speed limit, so a Hirer-Res Default Celestia is highly needed, in order to give a better idea of Celestia capabilities, mainly for newbie.
If I understand correctly, Chris proposal is for a "minimal" Hi-Res release, about 120-150 MB, but I think that a smaller one would be better, say 50-80 MB, due to the wide-spreaded hate for big downloads.

But your proposal is for a much bigger Default Celestia Package, containing practically all the spacecrafts (non SF), all the Planets- Moons at 2k-4k, asteroids and comets, and some nebulae, all on one CD.
Having 13.2 GB of Celestia files on my HD, I tried to make a dimensional check for this, and here are the results:
SPACECRAFT AND PROBES= 160 MB (but I haven't many of them, e.g. almost all the Russian ones), so we can reach about 200 MB;
PLANETS, MOONS, etc. at 4k-2k res. (but 8k Earth, Moon, Mars)= 360 MB;
NEBULAE, etc.= 60 MB (but I added many other objects you didn't mention, e.g. black holes, pulsar, protoplanetary disk, and so on).

A total of about 600 MB, more or less, so one CD could contain all the stuff you are asking for.
But (there is always a "but") who and how would produce, distribute, and regularly upgrade it?
I have seen such proposals in other forums, always died without results, because it's not practical.
And, most important, who needs it?
Thinking about your CD proposal, how many Celestians are truly interested in a set of Hi-Res packages, totalling 600 MB?
Consider that many (most?) of them actually use the 1.3.2 release, losing all the improvements that were added in later versions and patches, so I think that their interest is out of the Hi-Res world.
Moreover many are not interested on real spacecraft, preferring the Sci-Fi stuff.
On the other side, the interested ones, like me and surely you, don't need such big packages, because I have my own downloads that, as yours and anyone else's, are personally based on my ideas on what is and what is not OK for me.
We take care personally of the addition of new Hi-Res textures/ models/ releases/ patches, when available.
Just for an example, I never added the Skylab in my shows, because actually it is, IMHO, horrible to be seen, but this doesn't mean that the other people here have my same idea.
So my question is: why go along this way?
Just for love of discussion.
Bye

Andrea

I propose the following...

1. LORES version --- the existing usual Celestia distribution.

2. MEDRES version --- a distribution containing largest available non-VT textures for solar system. (this would give all those without high-end graphics cards the best quality possible on their hardware) BTW: I don't think 4K is a high enough resolution to be considered "HIRES", so I would be happy to see 8K or larger ones in here as long as they are non-VT (I'm not sure if I've actually seen any non-VT textures higher than 4K though). Of course this may not be practical anyway, as the perfomance of lower spec hardware may mean anything larger than 4K is unusable.

3. HIRES version --- Unfortunately I think that download sizes would make this impractical for distribution over the internet. ie. I don't think enough people would download it to make it worth all the effort put into it. Better to stick with the status quo perhaps.

Personally I would be more interested in seeing a more organised or formal classification / documentation scheme for addons to make it clearer what hardware pre-requisites are required for a given addon.

I'm not sure what the objection to SF addons is... the existing distributions already have these. eg. Space Station V and Orion.

Just my 2CW... although if I had the time I'm sure I could spend a few dollars.

Chuft-Captain wrote:I'm not sure what the objection to SF addons is... the existing distributions already have these. eg. Space Station V and Orion.

Sci-fi add-ons will definitely *not* be part of either the standard or hi-res Celestia packages. I don't have a problem with them as add-ons--I have a few installed myself--but I'm adamant that the official Celestia packages contain just real spacecraft and planets.

--Chris

chris wrote:--but I'm adamant that the official Celestia packages contain just real spacecraft and planets.
--Chris

I agree that if people want Sci-Fi they can download and install them, however can you clarify what you mean by "real". Do you mean "existing" already built historical craft, (Voyager etc) or do you broaden this definition to include arguably "scientifically accurate" future craft eg. Space Station V and Orion?

CC,

Sorry, but the spacestation and craft you mention are pure SF from the movie 2001.

There are hopes for a toroidal commercial spacestation made from inflatable modules, but that may or may not happen.

Orion has been chosen for the name of NASA's CEV, but it's nothing like 2001's Orion.

Like Chris, I think the official version of Celestia should stick with a selection of real or historical spacecraft that have actually flown. Those choices alone will be hard enough to make!

Chuft-Captain wrote:(I'm not sure if I've actually seen any non-VT textures higher than 4K though).

http://www.shatters.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8838

Don's 16k Non-VT Mars textures, which are freaking beautiful. I'm sure there are others, but that was the 1st one to pop in my head.

selden wrote:Sorry, but the spacestation and craft you mention are pure SF from the movie 2001.

Yes I know, but Kubrick was arguably scientifically accurate in most respects in that movie...at least until the last 1/2 hour or so!!!
What I was really wondering is if Chris' comments mean that the new policy will be to remove SS-V and Orion from future distributions. This may upset people such as Frank.

selden wrote:There are hopes for a toroidal commercial spacestation made from inflatable modules, but that may or may not happen.

That would be the BA module. The first one's in orbit (albeit a scaled down prototype). Lets hope there's still a means of getting to orbit when BA's ready with their full-scale hab. I think that's going to the the major obstacle in the next few years/decades.

CC,

SS-V and Orion are not in the official Celestia distribution. They were added by Frank Gregorio to his ED version of Celestia. Frank decides what's included in that. (Actually, I think they're one of the addon educational modules, not in the base distribution, but I could be mistaken.)

How about ElChristou, Runar and myself building up tacitly a "director's cut" hires set in CelestialMatters, without anybody able to interfere ?

hi hi...

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:How about ElChristou, Runar and myself building up tacitly a "director's cut" hires set in CelestialMatters, without anybody able to interfere ?

hi hi...

Bye Fridger

I'm not complaining

selden wrote:SS-V and Orion are not in the official Celestia distribution. They were added by Frank Gregorio to his ED version of Celestia. Frank decides what's included in that. (Actually, I think they're one of the addon educational modules, not in the base distribution, but I could be mistaken.)

I stand corrected.
Actually, just after making that post, I did have this vague memory of downloading and installing the 2001 Spacecraft addon long ago,-- I've had them so long, that I guess I just assumed that I'd got them with the official distribution. (I did say it was a "vague" memory didn't I?)

Apologies to all for the confusion.
CC

I wasn??t aware of this discussion... But here??s my two cents...

Cham wrote:I advocate a CD size content, of about 500 MB (total)

This is exactly what i was about to suggest myself. A CD size is ideal, as it allows the user one easy back-up option, as well as provide for other modes of distribution.

Cham wrote:I advocate all textures (planets, moons) to be 2k and 4k of resolution

I would like to see higher resolution than that for the Earth: maybe a full 8k set. 4k is good for the other planets, the Galilean moons and Titan. 2k for smaller bodies where possible...

Cham wrote:I advocate also to include ALL available spacecraft and probes (no SF, of course).

I don??t see why *All* spacecraft should be included. I would propose a selection of the most important historical milestones, together with the more spectacular ones from our own times. What these are i am sure everybody has their own ideas about: my personal selection would have been Sputnik, Vostok, Mariner 4, Voyager 1&2, Apollo 11, Apollo 13, The joint Soyuz/Apollo, Vega 1, Columbia, Viking, Cassini, the Hubble and the ISS... But the exact list is less important than that there are a good selection of quality models that represents our space history broadly.

Of course, some missions do not exist in hi-res. I think that for a hi-res package, we should then focus on creating these more than just including everything.

Cham wrote:I also advocate a much improved database of asteroids and comets, and some popular nebulae (Orion, Helix, M57 ring, and few others).

And the one million star database...

ANDREA wrote:If I understand correctly, Chris proposal is for a "minimal" Hi-Res release, about 120-150 MB, but I think that a smaller one would be better, say 50-80 MB, due to the wide-spreaded hate for big downloads

Remember that more and more people get broadband, and the broadband gets faster all the time. I don??t think 500 MB is too scary... By the time the Hi-Res package is ready for distribution, the number of broadband users in the world will probably have doubled...

ANDREA wrote:Thinking about your CD proposal, how many Celestians are truly interested in a set of Hi-Res packages, totalling 600 MB?

This should be thought of as an introduction to Celestia works, not as a definite Celestia package. It will interest many newbies, and if accompagnied by good documentation, also encourage them to explore the possibilities. Seasoned users will always create custom installs anyway, so this is not for them.

For example, i was contacted by a computer magazine not long ago that wanted to do the same thing that is being discussed here for a cover CD. Though they did not restrict themselves to non-fiction, it shows that there is interest in such a thing.

selden wrote:I think the official version of Celestia should stick with a selection of real or historical spacecraft that have actually flown. Those choices alone will be hard enough to make!

I absolutely agree - for two important reasons:
1) Fiction is very hard to judge: it is too much a matter of taste. Trying to include fiction here would bog us down in endless discussion. Really.
2) It would destroy utterly the focus Celestia has on science and accuracy: it would reduce it to an entertainment package. In the longer term, that can undo the entire Celestia project because the specialists we need to develop it further will simply lose interest - or not discover it??s underlying value at all. To say it bluntly, scifi in the official package is a PR disaster.

- rthorvald

rthorvald wrote:1) Fiction is very hard to judge: it is too much a matter of taste. Trying to include fiction here would bog us down in endless discussion. Really.
2) It would destroy utterly the focus Celestia has on science and accuracy: it would reduce it to an entertainment package. In the longer term, that can undo the entire Celestia project because the specialists we need to develop it further will simply lose interest - or not discover it??s underlying value at all. To say it bluntly, scifi in the official package is a PR disaster.

I totally, completely and irrevocably agree with this.

rthorvald wrote:I wasn??t aware of this discussion... But here??s my two cents... To say it bluntly, scifi in the official package is a PR disaster.
- rthorvald

As you know, Science-Fiction is my passion, but I totally agree with You Runar ! The choice will be always not so easy, what spacecrafts are the most important, what textures, VT etc... SF could be another official or unoficial packages, based on the same model... later. Jeam

Argh, yes, I agree, no scifi in an official Celestia distribution please!

Some further thoughts about a hires texture set.
===============================

Well, as most are aware of, I have both rather strict standards as to the scientific documentation of what is included into the official distribution and also extended (and proven) expertise in high-quality texture making.

In case the composition of a hires package will become a "community effort" with someone responsible for the final selection, I see substantial dangers as to the above-mentioned issue of texture "authenticity".

The point being that quite a number of talented and experienced texture creators in our community might hardly hesitate to eliminate and add features to their textures that are artistically "unwanted" and "desired", respectively, despite being NOT "real". Obviously, a subsequent editor can hardly examine the textures wrto such tacit modifications in detail. The personal respective "standards of authenticity" depend on the professional background, interest and lots more.

On the other hand, if a small team with well-know rigorous standards and proven expertise could be located and also was willing to do most or all of this job, the result would be of much more reliable quality, consistency and authenticiy.

So my remark above

t00fri wrote:How about ElChristou, Runar and myself building up tacitly a "director's cut" hires set in CelestialMatters, without anybody able to interfere Wink ?

hi hi...

was only partially meant as a joke. On the other hand, I seriously doubt that the three of us would ever find the required time to complete such a challenging task. Hence, my above remarks were certainly not made to bring our three names into the respective discussion!

Clearly to locate and convince such an "ideal" set of texture experts seems very hard. Therefore we should NOT forget to establish a detailed set of documentation requirements before the project starts up as a community effort.

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:Clearly to locate and convince such an "ideal" set of texture experts seems very hard. Therefore we should NOT forget to establish a detailed set of documentation requirements before the project starts up as a community effort.

It seems to me that the best way forward is to first define *what features* the hi-res package should have, without regard to what is actually available.

When a list is achieved and agreed upon, we can "complete the order" to the extent possible within the spesifications for authenticity that (someone competent) draws up.

The items that does not exist, or that falls short of the criteria, can be posted as a "wanted" sticky in the forums.

So, we need two teams: one to define the criteria and another for coming up with a proposal for the content.

After that, it is up to all of us to contribute where possible to make it happen. Note that it is not neccecary for the "wish list" to be completed before publishing the hi-res package: it is only neccecary that those items that is included meets the requirements. Items that are missing can be substituted with the existing lo-res elements, and the package can be updated whenever the official Celestia program is.

- rthorvald