Celestia Forums

Well, the topic name says it all, I belive. Its just a ordinary wish-list where Celestia users can post their toughts about what should be placed in future versions of the great program Celestia.
I have just tought about a few things:


1) More brighter and realistic galaxies;
Ok, lets see the truth; the Galaxies in Celestia isnt just as sparkly as the once we see with pictures form the Hubble. And it would add a lot to the already great realism of Celestia, if we had more colourful galaxies instead of just a gray haze that resembles a spiral-galaxy.

2) More tours;
What about a quick tour of the Voyager-mission, includign orbits and automatic time-effects and scripts. The tour can start in the year when Voyager 1 was launched, and can end when Voyager has come as long out as it is today.

3) Scripts, events and suprises.

So anyone want to add something? Just drop in a post.


Stargazer.

Your suggestions sound great to me! I'd also like to see some enhancements in the performance of Celestia - It has trouble running smoothly on a Radeon VE and 800mhz processor machine (which I admit is not the best on the planet, but if it can run UT well, it should be able to do Celestia, too).

Stargazer_2098 wrote:<snip>
2) More tours;
What about a quick tour of the Voyager-mission, includign orbits and automatic time-effects and scripts. The tour can start in the year when Voyager 1 was launched, and can end when Voyager has come as long out as it is today.
<snip>

I think being able to select from a list of tours would be a great option. This way, the Celestia community could make some nice tours of objects and events (like eclipses, education tours ,etc) and the best ones could be included with the Celestia distro.

Ideally, you should be able to d/l a new tour from a website, drop it in the Celestia directory and select it from within the program.

Stargazer_2098 wrote: 1) More brighter and realistic galaxies;
Ok, lets see the truth; the Galaxies in Celestia isnt just as sparkly as the once we see with pictures form the Hubble.

The problem with Hubble's pictures is that they're flat, 2D. you cannot "visit" those galaxies, you have to invent a 3D model. That's lots of hard work, but Chris seems determined to model galaxies in 3D, and consequently it will take some effort before they are implemented.

Stargazer_2098 wrote: 2) What about a quick tour of the Voyager-mission, includign orbits and automatic time-effects and scripts.

That's an excellent idea, and Chris has already advertised for info on flight data on Voyager to incorporate the historical (and future) path of the space probe into Celestia.

Stargazer_2098 wrote:3) Scripts, events and suprises.

Doug wrote:Ideally, you should be able to d/l a new tour from a website, drop it in the Celestia directory and select it from within the program.

It's already possible to make scripts in Celestia! Make them with your favourite text editor and load them from the file menu (open script). You just need someone to write the scripts, I guess...

jliechty wrote:I'd also like to see some enhancements in the performance of Celestia

Of course, the better performance the better

/Alexis

Anonymous wrote:It's already possible to make scripts in Celestia! Make them with your favourite text editor and load them from the file menu (open script). You just need someone to write the scripts, I guess...

Hmmm, I don't seem to have that option under the File menu in the Linux version. I guess my next request is to have that added!

Alexis wrote:

Stargazer_2098 wrote: 1) More brighter and realistic galaxies;
Ok, lets see the truth; the Galaxies in Celestia isnt just as sparkly as the once we see with pictures form the Hubble.

The problem with Hubble's pictures is that they're flat, 2D. you cannot "visit" those galaxies, you have to invent a 3D model. That's lots of hard work, but Chris seems determined to model galaxies in 3D, and consequently it will take some effort before they are implemented.

Yes, it's going to take a while to get this all figured out. It's very difficult to come up with a galaxy model that:

1. Is truly 3D
2. Looks great when view from a distance
3. Looks great when viewed from inside

Galaxies are currently rendered so that they appear approximately as they would to your eye in a dark sky. If I rendered them so that they looked like Hubble images, the Milky Way would appear much too bright. The only way around this is to introduce some sort of exposure parameter--this is likely to appear in some future version of Celestia.

Alexis wrote:

Stargazer_2098 wrote: 2) What about a quick tour of the Voyager-mission, includign orbits and automatic time-effects and scripts.

That's an excellent idea, and Chris has already advertised for info on flight data on Voyager to incorporate the historical (and future) path of the space probe into Celestia.

Still working on this, though other issues have priority right now . . .

Alexis wrote:

Stargazer_2098 wrote:3) Scripts, events and suprises.

Doug wrote:Ideally, you should be able to d/l a new tour from a website, drop it in the Celestia directory and select it from within the program.

It's already possible to make scripts in Celestia! Make them with your favourite text editor and load them from the file menu (open script). You just need someone to write the scripts, I guess...

I'm currently in the middle of a total rewrite of the Celestia scripting system. celx is a complete language for extending Celestia with support for scalar and vector expressions, loops, user defined functions, etc. Most of the commands from the existing scripting 'language' appear as functions in celx, although the syntax is quite different. In addition to loading scripts for tours, you'll be able to write scripts for custom planet/spacecraft orbits and bind keys and toolbar items to bits of script.

--Chris

chris wrote:I'm currently in the middle of a total rewrite of the Celestia scripting system. celx is a complete language for extending Celestia with support for scalar and vector expressions, loops, user defined functions, etc. Most of the commands from the existing scripting 'language' appear as functions in celx, although the syntax is quite different. In addition to loading scripts for tours, you'll be able to write scripts for custom planet/spacecraft orbits and bind keys and toolbar items to bits of script.

--Chris

Probably too late, but have you considered using Tcl (of Tcl/Tk fame) as the scripting/command language? You can get all the functionality you describe above, plus the ability to have Celestia controlled by another application. A short primer is here http://www.tcl.tk/scripting/primer.html

With this capability, others can write small apps to control Celestia in ways that far exceed what can be done with a script. I can imagine a skinned front-end control console that would be used to fly around the galaxy. This would also allow for an app that did a lot of processing to calculate a position/trajectory/time of interest and go there.

No more menus or dialogs ad-nausem. Just relagate the interface control to a separate app(s), and keep the main rendering engine of Celestia clean.

Tk would be a natural tool for developing the GUI's, and no compiler is required.

Just a thought.

Probably too late, but have you considered using Tcl (of Tcl/Tk fame) as the scripting/command language? You can get all the functionality you describe above, plus the ability to have Celestia controlled by another application. A short primer is here http://www.tcl.tk/scripting/primer.html

I thought about using Tcl for Celestia, but I'm not a big fan of its syntax. Also, I want a language with first class support for vectors and matrices so that it's easy to implement orbital calculations, camera manipulations, etc. Perhaps these are trivial reasons for not using a well tested, well documented, standard language like Tcl . . .

No more menus or dialogs ad-nausem. Just relagate the interface control to a separate app(s), and keep the main rendering engine of Celestia clean.

Tk would be a natural tool for developing the GUI's, and no compiler is required.

Tk as a GUI would sort of work, but I think that Windows users of Celestia would be disappointed in the UI regression. In my experience, cross platform GUI kits never give the 'polish' that using whatever toolkit is native to the platform. I don't want to come across as being too down on Tcl/Tk--they are very appropriate in a lot of cases.

--Chris

chris wrote:I thought about using Tcl for Celestia, but I'm not a big fan of its syntax. Also, I want a language with first class support for vectors and matrices so that it's easy to implement orbital calculations, camera manipulations, etc. Perhaps these are trivial reasons for not using a well tested, well documented, standard language like Tcl . . .

I agree, the syntax leaves much to be desired. Tcl will allow you to create any command(s) you want to do calculations or control. I guess the really great thing about using Tcl, is that you get an instant 3rd party application control. This would beat the heck out of script writing.

Tk as a GUI would sort of work, but I think that Windows users of Celestia would be disappointed in the UI regression. In my experience, cross platform GUI kits never give the 'polish' that using whatever toolkit is native to the platform. I don't want to come across as being too down on Tcl/Tk--they are very appropriate in a lot of cases.

What GUI?

Celestia is for the most part controlled by the keyboard, and a few simple dialog/preference windows. I think you could make it look almost identical with Tk widgets (buttons, radio selections, text fields, etc..).

I can imagine using the Nview capability on my graphics card to run Celestia full screen in on one display, while a very cool control/fly/astronomy app runs on the other and has Celestia do it's bidding. Think of it as a cross platform OLE. Rather than write a use once script, write a general use application to fly that mission to Mars, find the next eclipse, or dynamicaly load textures.

I'll shut up now.

chris wrote:It's very difficult to come up with a galaxy model that:

1. Is truly 3D
2. Looks great when view from a distance
3. Looks great when viewed from inside

Do you have any ideas on how to achieve this? I've seen that the guys behind Starry Night have come up with a Deep Space Explorer that is supposed to travel among nearby galaxies (but only from the outside), have you tried it? I'm curious about the product and am thinking of buying it ($49.95) only I would like to see a demo first, or some kind of info on what the program looks like, which seems impossible to learn from their website (they only have some nice-looking but stupid TV-commercials online).

/Alexis

alexis wrote:

chris wrote:It's very difficult to come up with a galaxy model that:

1. Is truly 3D
2. Looks great when view from a distance
3. Looks great when viewed from inside

Do you have any ideas on how to achieve this? I've seen that the guys behind Starry Night have come up with a Deep Space Explorer that is supposed to travel among nearby galaxies (but only from the outside), have you tried it? I'm curious about the product and am thinking of buying it ($49.95) only I would like to see a demo first, or some kind of info on what the program looks like, which seems impossible to learn from their website (they only have some nice-looking but stupid TV-commercials online).

I bought Deep Space Explorer largely because I was curious about their galaxy rendering. I was rather disappointed . . . They just texture map photos onto bulging discs. No transparency or anything. I don't think they're using 3D hardware either, because the camera animation is jerky. They do have a nice galaxy catalog and a few cute UI ideas, but Celestia and StarStrider blow Deep Space Explorer out of the water graphically. I wish that I'd saved the $50 for a copy of Starry Night Pro instead.

--Chris

Chris I would like to see landscapes in one of the next versions of Celestia...Maybe combining different resolutions would keep the framerate somewhat quick...May look like a cross between now and Noctis IV...but just a tad better...Using 640x480 does look better than Z buffer graphics

In the reality, can't see the shadowed side of the moon on the blue sky!!
But in the world of celestia, i can do it, it's a mistake...

Rassilon wrote:Chris I would like to see landscapes in one of the next versions of Celestia...Maybe combining different resolutions would keep the framerate somewhat quick...May look like a cross between now and Noctis IV...but just a tad better...Using 640x480 does look better than Z buffer graphics

I'd love to have this working, but it's a very difficult problem . . . One 'compromise' solution is to have high detail terrain patches on some parts of a planet. Real time high detail procedurally generated terrain is a serious research project :>

--Chris

What if we had a button that could bring us directly unto a terrestia-planets surface?
So that when you press this button, the camera moves straight above the planet and start to lower towards it. When the camera reaches the amtosphere, the screen can go black for just a few secounds while the terrain is drawn.
This has been done in the game Noctis, using the Nocti-engine to simulate landscapes and mountains after having droped the landing-capsule. I belive this is possible to implement in Celestia as well.
If you want to see what I mean, head over to http://members.designheaven.com/~44/noctis.html .
Noctis is, as Celestia, a free and safe program to use, and it weights at just below 1 MB.

Stargazer.

I am using celsetia to simulate a mission aboard a star ship. It would be nice to have varying sounds that would add a new dimension to the flight through space. Also a type of radar blip that would increase as one draws nearer to the target. Finally a superimposed ships view port. And how about multipe monitor support. Celestia is great without thess but I would like to see these items in a future version.

John

AJNBAP@cs.com wrote:I am using celsetia to simulate a mission aboard a star ship. It would be nice to have varying sounds that would add a new dimension to the flight through space. Also a type of radar blip that would increase as one draws nearer to the target. Finally a superimposed ships view port. And how about multipe monitor support. Celestia is great without thess but I would like to see these items in a future version.

John

...and what about some laser guns? ;-))

Bye Fridger

Hmmm..... while I have to agree that some sounds would be very nice, I feel strongly compelled to say the following :
1) Radar blips would be extremely irritating. What about some motion noises like the Star Trek warp noise when travelling at high speeds ? Guess that would infringe on copyright and probably annoy some people too.... Some kind of sounds would be nice though.
2) Superimposed ships view port ? Aaaaaaarrrrghhh ! That sounds grotesque ! I love the open style, "Gods-eye" view in Celestia, cluttering it with a ship would spoil its purity and realism*.
3) Multpile monitor support I'm sure would be a great idea for those of us fortunate to be blessed with multiple monitors.... just to fantasise here a little bit :
Have a different angle of view on each monitor, orientate each one correctly around yourself..... mmm.... 360 degre view.... drooooll.....
Alas I have only the one monitor and there ain't much chance of another. Oh well.

I'm going to assume the laser guns was just a fillipant joke.

(Mad Boris)

Anonymous wrote:
I'm going to assume the laser guns was just a fillipant joke.

(Mad Boris)

You bet;-). With "radar blips that would increase as one draws nearer to the target (!)", a "superimposed ships view port" and some handy laser guns you'd just need a card board box in addition, to sell the game...

Bye Fridger

Speaking of dual-monitor support, that would be kind of hard to do on video cards that don't like to render OpenGL to both screens (which includes many consumer-level cards today). Thus, this feature would currently be limited to cards such as 3DLabs Wildcat, etc. However, Matrox's new "Parhelia" cards will support rendering onto as many as 3 monitors at once; that may be something that would be worth the effort to support.