Celestia Forums

It's been a long wait, but Celestia 1.4.0 is finally ready for Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X. The download page on the Celestia site has been updated with the new pacckages:

http://www.celestiaproject.net/celestia/download.html

Some of the important new features in version 1.4.0 of Celestia:

- Proper support for stars in binary (and larger) systems
- Catalogs of visual and spectroscopic binaries
- A catalog of every known star withing 25 light years of the sun, including orbits for multiple star systems (there
s eve a quadruple system!)
- Improved galaxy rendering, and a catalog of over 10,000 galaxies with accurate positions, orientations, and sizes
- Support for advanced rendering with OpenGL 2.0--multiple light sources, better eclipse shadows
- A complete overhaul Gnome/Gtk interface (for Linux users; works on Windows too)
- Updated solar system and extrasolar planet catalogs

--Chris

Chris,

Thanks a lot for that new version ! It's really appreciated.

However, there are two things with it :

the galaxy templates have not been updated (especially the bared spirals). They aren't right. The bared spirals are extremelly ugly.

Also, there's no French localisation in this new OS X version. Dirkpitt made a built which is showing proper French localisation. Apparently, you didn't included that in the official version.

Cham wrote:Chris,

the galaxy templates have not been updated (especially the bared spirals). They aren't right. The bared spirals are extremelly ugly.

Incidentally, why do you address this to Chris? It's my work, after all...

EDIT: Aha at least you have later added a due sentence of "politeness"

Cham wrote:Thanks a lot for that new version ! Very Happy It's really appreciated.

before getting to your well familiar critics...

As we have widely discussed, this is your personal opinion.
You are free to use the ones you prefer.

In any case the templates are the ones from FT1.2. They can certainly all be improved, but they are definitely not incorrect. Noone has provided replacement SB spirals that have been

a) properly brightness normalized,
b) properly aligned,
c) properly been unfolded to face-on view.

My SB spirals may not please you, others like them for now, and most importantly, they have been

a) properly brightness normalized,
b) properly alligned
c) properly been unfolded to face-on view.

I have been waiting all the time to see some concrete proposals from you! I did receive ~50 attempts from ElChristou. He at least tried.

Bye Fridger

Fridger,

I don't have the tools and the computer knowledge to do the templates myself.

And I really can't understand why you feel it's just a matter of opinion. IT IS NOT ! Those galactic templates are OBJECTIVELY horrible, and others have agreed with this before. They don't even looks like the real galaxies out there :



The barred spirals shapes (especially the Milky way) look likes deformed and twisted. They feel completely unrealistic and crude approximations.

Cham wrote:Fridger,

I don't have the tools and the computer knowledge to do the templates myself.

And I really can't understand why you feel it's just a matter of opinion. IT IS NOT ! Those galactic templates are OBJECTIVELY horrible, and others have agreed with this before. They don't even looks like the real galaxies out there :

The barred spirals shapes (especially the Milky way) look likes deformed and twisted. They feel completely
unrealistic and crude approximations.

As we discussed at length, I am certainly as competent in these matters as you are. . I found after many tries that they presently represent the best compromise. That's why they are in for now.

ElChristou does not program just like you. But --in contrast to your unproductive critique-- he tried hard to contribute improved templates. The tool is available both to him and to you.

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:ElChristou does not program just like you. But --in contrast to your unproductive critique-- he tried hard to contribute improved templates. The tool is available both to him and to you.

Bye Fridger

Fridger, this is "intellectual terrorism", and it's very condescending from your part.

Cham wrote:

t00fri wrote:ElChristou does not program just like you. But --in contrast to your unproductive critique-- he tried hard to contribute improved templates. The tool is available both to him and to you.

Bye Fridger

Fridger, this is "intellectual terrorism", and it's very condescending from your part.

I find -- in contrast-- that after all the tedious work that has been done about galaxies, you are just chosing the wrong tone!

Everyone can help to improve the templates. The 'bmp2pts' tool is around to be used. Also for OS-X people!

I spent weeks of experimentation on that task. I am not a beginner in image manipulation issues, I suppose...

Yet, if someone can do REALLY better (including all the normalization & orientation contraints!), please let me know. I will then be happy to update the templates.

Bye Fridger

I've just found a bug in the new version, about galactic rendering in the Milky Way. When I get very close to the Milky Way, there's a huge brightness glitch occuring at about 12000 LY from the center. The galaxy becomes highly oversaturated and just disappear after a tiny reduction of distance. The galaxy reappears after that. Here's a small "movie" of the effect :









Anyone else is experiencing something like this ?

Guys, about galaxies, let's wait new features with cmod points to work again on this...

Cham wrote:I've just found a bug in the new version, about galactic rendering in the Milky Way. When I get very close to the Milky Way, there's a huge brightness glitch occuring at about 12000 LY from the center. The galaxy becomes highly oversaturated and just disappear after a tiny reduction of distance. The galaxy reappears after that. Here's a small "movie" of the effect :









Anyone else is experiencing something like this ?

I am.

Yes I can reproduce that, although the present galaxy rendering is really meant to be viewed from larger distance! However, it's easy to fix. We'll need another maintenance release anyway for other reasons

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:[...] We'll need another maintenance release anyway for other reasons

Bye Fridger

What does this mean exactly? And when?
Are you talking about 1.4.1?

Adirondack

Adirondack wrote:

t00fri wrote:[...] We'll need another maintenance release anyway for other reasons

Bye Fridger

What does this mean exactly? And when?
Are you talking about 1.4.1?

Adirondack

The number is not the essential aspect.

There are a few little things that people have reported. Like that the Windows release starts up with rather nonsensical initial options. There is still a bug in the date/time setting dialog under Windows. We'll find a few more, I am sure.

We'll do it when Chris is back (i.e. very soon).

Bye Fridger

Ah, I see.
Thanks a lot, Fridger.
Good night...

Adirondack

Cham wrote:Also, there's no French localisation in this new OS X version. Dirkpitt made a built which is showing proper French localisation. Apparently, you didn't included that in the official version.

Au contraire - French and Spanish menu and panel translations by ElChristou *are* included in the official version. What you're probably referring to are hud message translations - as more work and testing is required, these and missing translations for other parts of the interface are coming in a later version of Celestia for OS X.

^^ THX

new ! "%" => sol color

Hi, all,
Just to be sure: is the 1.4 final built on exactly same tree than the latest CVS?

Boux wrote:Hi, all,
Just to be sure: is the 1.4 final built on exactly same tree than the latest CVS?

YES.

Bye Fridger

Celestia Team,

Thanks for all your work its greatly appreciated!