Celestia Forums

Downloaded and still buzzy with 128k BlueMarbleNextGeneration.

These downloads are so huge because they are in png.
Fortunatelly their exist a format that is lossless and compresses better.
JPEG2000 supports lossless compression.
Is this supported in Celestia?

And when I use in my virtual texture folder png's and other image formats at the same time, can Celestia look at the image format by looking at the images theirselves?

There is a .ctx file in the blue marble next generation addon that states:
TileType "png".
If that line of code is deleted, will celestia recognise the filetypes by looking at the images??

unfortunately JPG2000-lossless compresses
only marginally better then PNG , and compresses/decompresses
also a lot slower,
so I think this is not the way to go for Celestia

Ren?©

That's only tru for pictures where there are much area's of the same color.

With more photo like images jpg2000 lossless even compressess a lot better than png.

And can someone please answer my question about different image formats !!!

duds26 wrote:
And can someone please answer my question about different image formats !!!

Celestia uses JPG, PNG and BMP formats. The CTX reference you made
earlier is used only for virtual textures to describe the format of each
of the images used within a particular level (or portion) of the virtual
texture add-on.

As far as using the image formats themselves, Celestia must ALWAYS
be told what image to use for a surface or cloud texture, but you can
actually describe the formats in an SSC statement so that ANY image
format can be selected by using the following in your SSC:

"Earth" "Sol"
{
Texture "Earth.*"

Notice the asterisk. This will cause Celestia to use the first file
it finds that matches the name of the texture to be used. If you
are using JPG's, then it'll use a JPG file. If you're using PNG's, it'll
load up your PNG file.

Is that what you were asking?

Thanks, Brain-Dead

A minor correction:

Celestia supports JPG, PNG and DDS image formats.

Celestia does not officially support BMP format. The format is extremely complex and Celestia implements only a very small subset of it. If a BMP image works for you with Celestia, consider yourself fortunate.

selden wrote:A minor correction:

Celestia supports JPG, PNG and DDS image formats.

Celestia does not officially support BMP format. The format is extremely complex and Celestia implements only a very small subset of it. If a BMP image works for you with Celestia, consider yourself fortunate.

Thanks for the clarification, Selden. I guess I forgot about DDS
textures because I never could use them before. As to the BMP's I
really did NOT know this information. Every BMP file I have ever
encountered (at least in models for Celestia) has worked flawlessly.

Thanks again, Brain-Dead

duds26 wrote:Downloaded and still buzzy with 128k BlueMarbleNextGeneration.

Please note that the 128k BMNG data is BLOWN UP from the original 84k imaging data. This means that you are downloading mostly EMPTY magnification, not worth the additional harddisk space relative to 64k. You would do much better installing an excellent 64k BMNG texture set, e.g. done with my F-TexTools. But that's the "joys" of the Motherlode...hopefully improving after Bob Hegwoods engagement!

Perhaps you have never heard about the crucial difference between scaling images up and scaling them down, relative to the given native resolution: scaling up means "shooting blindly" (<= extrapolation) while scaling down means using pixel support throughout in a well-controlled interpolation algorithm!

Bye Fridger

Please be aware that the Blue Marble textures on the ML are
very close to being DELETED now.

In case no one ever noticed, the Arctic ice packs are completely
missing from the majority of textures created from NASA's Blue Marble
imagery.

I'm still waiting for a clarification from NASA, but it looks like these
add-ons are headed for the trash can.

Sorry if this offends, but ACCURACY is GOING to be the rule on the
ML unless someone wishes to FIRE me.

Thanks, Brain-Dead

BobHegwood wrote:Sorry if this offends, but ACCURACY is GOING to be the rule on the
ML unless someone wishes to FIRE me.

Hmm, then you'll have to trash about 3/4 of all the stuff there !

Cham wrote:

BobHegwood wrote:Sorry if this offends, but ACCURACY is GOING to be the rule on the
ML unless someone wishes to FIRE me.

Hmm, then you'll have to trash about 3/4 of all the stuff there !

We will see...

well i already told bob that i have NO intention of updating my Earth Blue Marble map
( vintage 2001) because of the Great tutorial on celestia matters for the tools
My mom could even make a vt fallowing it

The format is extremely complex and Celestia implements only a

Selden,

I guess you are kidding about BMP being extremely complex
right ??


Ren?©

BobHegwood wrote:In case no one ever noticed, the Arctic ice packs are completely missing from the majority of textures created from NASA's Blue Marble imagery.

I'm still waiting for a clarification from NASA, but it looks like these add-ons are headed for the trash can.

Bob,

the problem here is that the BMNG only shows land surface (with ice),
shallow water and shaded topography but no sea ice:



What you want is a map that shows land surface (with ice),
ocean color and sea ice:


Map: BM 2002

Unfortunately the BMNG doesn't provide this.

But that's the "joys" of the Motherlode...

No, that's the "joys" of the NASA.


Adirondack

Currently the F-TexTools aren't available for download.


If their just scaled up than I'll don't download them.

duds26 wrote:Currently the F-TexTools aren't available for download.

How about checking first before you tell such nonsense!
I hope you didn't look at the Motherlode, because my programs will NEVER be found there.

There is a whole FORUM about the F-TexTools at our CelestialMatters site!

http://forum.celestialmatters.org/viewforum.php?f=6

There are one-click scripts for Windows by cartrite and a tutorial etc.

If their just scaled up than I'll don't donwload them.

You obviously didn't understand a word of what I was explaining...

YOU were downloading the 128k texture by Fightspit from the Motherlode that is largely an empty blow-up. I said that this 128k texture is NOT worth the harddisk space required, since the actual resolution is only 84k.

The F-TexTools are not textures, they are rather a set of speed optimized C++ tools to produce highest quality monster textures on normal home computers...

Bye Fridger

Adirondack wrote:What you want is a map that shows land surface (with ice),
ocean color and sea ice:


Map: BM 2002

Unfortunately the BMNG doesn't provide this.

But that's the "joys" of the Motherlode...

No, that's the "joys" of the NASA.


Adirondack

Most insiders know of course the reason for the lacking sea ice in the BMNG textures. I do have detailed correspondence about this point with Reto Stoeckli, the lead scientist of the BMNG project. Just in case you are interested in some background info.

Since the sea ice also changes with the season, I don't know what your image above is supposed to mean at the level of the monthly BMNG textures! There was simply not enough manpower @NASA to do detailed sea ice maps for each of the 12 months at the BMNG level.

In one of the old BM 2002 tiff textures there was a pretty bad and low-resolution layer for the sea ice. I hope you didn't use that layer in your image above...

Again one of the "joys" of the motherlode, I suppose.

Bye Fridger

t00fri wrote:Since the sea ice also changes with the season, I don't know what your image above is supposed to mean at the level of the monthly BMNG textures! There was simply not enough manpower @NASA to do detailed sea ice maps for each of the 12 months at the BMNG level.

In one of the old BM 2002 tiff textures there was a pretty bad and low-resoultion layer for the sea ice. I hope you didn't use that layer in your image above...

Again one of the "joys" of the motherlode, I suppose.

Bye Fridger

If I may, Good Doctor...

We are CLEARLY trying to reform the place, and yet all anyone
ever hears is criticism. Why is this? Just curious.

I have been working on the site for the last week or so, spending
approximately 10-12 hours per day in trying to accurately assess
what we have, and what needs to go.

At any rate, I THANK YOU very much for the above explanation.
I have still had no word from NASA, but then again *I* ain't in
with the boys like you are.

The BMNG textures will gone after I get back to the ML.

Thanks, Brain-Dead

Bob,

by no means I meant to criticise your hard work! In my view the amount of add-ons & images @ML that have flaws of some kind is just too large for one person to sort out after such a long accumulation time.

No matter how much you work, the problem will remain that could only be resolved by a team of texture experts peer-reviewing carefully every incoming image. Just like we do it at CM. We also mutually review our own contributions before publication.

Cheers,
Fridger

t00fri wrote:Bob,

by no means I meant to criticise your hard work! In my view the amount of add-ons & images @ML that have flaws of some kind is just too large for one person to sort out after such a long accumulation time.

No matter how much you work, the problem will remain that could only be resolved by a team of texture experts peer-reviewing carefully every incoming image. Just like we do it at CM. We also mutually review our own contributions before publication.

Cheers,
Fridger

Thanks very much for the explanation, but I'm doing the very best
that I can. I would certainly welcome any peer review, but in my
case, my peer is Ulrich.

Anyone else care to join in? I know that Ulrich has been asking
for help, and I certainly would NOT mind if someone with MORE of
a scientific background would care to review what I'm doing
and/or join in.

At any rate, the offending BMNG textures are now (ALL) gone.

Take care, worn-out, Brain-Dead, old, Geezer Bob

BobHegwood wrote:Thanks very much for the explanation, but I'm doing the very best
that I can. I would certainly welcome any peer review, but in my
case, my peer is Ulrich.

Anyone else care to join in? I know that Ulrich has been asking
for help, and I certainly would NOT mind if someone with MORE of
a scientific background would care to review what I'm doing
and/or join in.

At any rate, the offending BMNG textures are now (ALL) gone.

Take care, worn-out, Brain-Dead, old, Geezer Bob

I very much appreciate Ulrich's and your efforts to 'clean out the attic' over at the Motherlode. I know that there have been a lot of complaints, but I just needed to grab a high resolution cloud texture (I'm busy over at the cloud textures thread ) and the Motherlode was my first stop.

--Chris