Where can I download 128k BMNG Surface Texture?

[Luciusperca]

I am looking for the 128k Blue Marble Next Generation Surface Map.
But Neither the 64k BMNG nor the 128k Version is available on celestiamotherlode.net
Where can I find them?

[ElChristou]

Didn't knew there was a 128k BMNG...

[BobHegwood]

HERE.

[ElChristou]

Where??

[Luciusperca]

Thats a very interresting Tutorial about creating VTs.
But there is no solution for the 128k problem in that thread.
Not to mention a downloadable texture pack.
However i'm shure that a complete 128k map was available on celestiamotherlode.

[t00fri]

Thats a very interresting Tutorial about creating VTs.
But there is no solution for the 128k problem in that thread.
Not to mention a downloadable texture pack.
However i'm shure that a complete 128k map was available on celestiamotherlode.

Please....there is NO 128k scientific input data to make a corresponding Celestia texture of. You may download a 128k Earth texture from the Motherlode, but it is fake and just costs you harddisk space for NOTHING! It's from scaling the 85k original data up to 128k, hence it does not provide a better resolution! (got it??)

At Celestial Matters we expect people to do their highest quality, optimized "monster" textures themselves, which is faster, saves bandwidth and --after completion-- gives you a good feeling of "achievement".

The whole process only takes 20 minutes for a 64k VT texture set.

Fridger

[Luciusperca]

ok, thanks for the reply. In fact the 128k Map i downloaded from motherlode DID NOT work, but I thought it might have been a broken .zip-part.

[BobHegwood]

ok, thanks for the reply. In fact the 128k Map i downloaded from motherlode DID NOT work, but I thought it might have been a broken .zip-part.

Can you tell me exactly which package you downloaded? I haven't quite gotten to all of these VT packages yet, so I would appreciate this
information so that I can check the package on my system. If it doesn't work, then we need to get rid of it.

Thanks, Bob

[Fightspit]

Oh I remember I hosted in motherlode a 128k BMNG but I decided to remove it (and also the 64K) from the server because of some reasons described by Fridger just before .

Here an OBSOLETE post where I started to publish these textures:

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9116

I you talk about a probably broken zip file that I reported and fixed in my following posts:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9116&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&start=15

But sorry, it is to late to download it

[duds26]

If the data is from a 85k -texture, there is still going to be more detail in a 128-extrapolated texture then in a 64k texture.

(For all the other stuff I agree with t00fri)

[t00fri]

If the data is from a 85k -texture, there is still going to be more detail in a 128-extrapolated texture then in a 64k texture.

(For all the other stuff I agree with t00fri)

If you ever learned some numerical math you would know that rescaling an image by extrapolation is a much less stable process than rescaling by interpolation

When you generate a 64k image from a 85k original, the rescaling only involves interpolation of the points. However, if you rescale a 128k image from a 85k image, you are exlusively doing extrapolation...

I thought this was generally known.

Fridger

[Don. Edwards]

While all the 128k Earth textures out there are simply an enlargement of an 85k texture, meaning that you are not gaining any more detail than the 85k it does allow for getting a little closer to the surface before it blurs out. Again its a false sens of detail. Of course in my heavy work with textures over the years I have found some utilities that can do a much better job of image extrapolation than others. Any enlargement tool built into just about any graphics app is not going to as good a job as a separate tool that designed to do only one thing. I will have to find 85k images in order to show what can be done. Although it is still extrapolation it can be done right.

Don. Edwards

[cartrite]

Here are a couple of screen shots from a 64k BMNG VT of the outer banks of North Carolina.

outerbanks-64k.jpg

outerbanks-64k-2.jpg

cartrite

[cartrite]

Here are the same images as above with a 512k specular map.

outerbanks-512k.jpg

outerbanks-512k-2.jpg

The specmap that I took these screen shots can be downloaded from my web site on the SWBD Specular Map page. There are level6, level7, and level8 folders with 1k png files with no residual light added.

cartrite

[BobHegwood]

Steve,

You just completely lost me here...
Of what use are level 6, 7, and 8 specular high-resolution textures if you don't have the corresponding
level 6, 7, and 8 surface maps? Did I miss something here again? Also, just to make certain that I know
what's going on here, you are still using only the levels 0-5 BMNG 64k surface map textures under level 6.
Yes?

Boy, you sure know how to confuse a guy...

[cartrite]

I'm not sure what the best way of using these are. What I did was add a line to the ssc file from the BMNG VT for September. Like so.

Code: Select all

AltSurface "BlueMarble-September" "Sol/Earth"
{
      Color [ 0.85 0.85 1.0 ]
      Texture "bluemarble.ctx"
      NormalMap "normals.*"
      SpecularTexture "spec.*"
      SpecularPower 25.0
      SpecularColor [ 0.8 0.8 0.85 ]
}

Then I put the spec files in the bmng folder from that same VT. When I run it in Celestia, the specmap that is in the alpha channel for levels 0 thru 5 get disabled. So this is bad. Probably the best way to do this would be to run FTexTools to produce a RGB VT. In other words skip running tx2rgba. Then you could do a separate VT for the spec map for levels 0 thru 5. That is probably the only way of getting the spec map enabled thru all the levels. But it doesn't really look right anyhow. Only when the is very little light on land and you can't see all the blurry pixels.
cartrite

[cartrite]

Of what use are level 6, 7, and 8 specular high-resolution textures if you don't have the corresponding
level 6, 7, and 8 surface maps?

Everyone can judge for themselves as to usability. It is rather limited use if you display them on a 64k. I think it is fun to play with around the coast lines.

64kspec.jpg

512kspec.jpg

cartrite

[BobHegwood]

I'm not sure what the best way of using these are. What I did was add a line to the ssc file from the BMNG VT for September. Like so.
Then I put the spec files in the bmng folder from that same VT. When I run it in Celestia, the specmap that is in the alpha channel for levels 0 thru 5 get disabled. So this is bad. Probably the best way to do this would be to run FTexTools to produce a RGB VT. In other words skip running tx2rgba. Then you could do a separate VT for the spec map for levels 0 thru 5. That is probably the only way of getting the spec map enabled thru all the levels. But it doesn't really look right anyhow. Only when the is very little light on land and you can't see all the blurry pixels.
cartrite

Okay, then you are just as confused as I am. That's good!
I have downloaded all of the files, and I may play with trying to create a separate specular VT just for the helluvit to see what
happens when I get finished. Thanks for the reply here. I really did not know what you were up to.

[BobHegwood]

Everyone can judge for themselves as to usability. It is rather limited use if you display them on a 64k. I think it is fun to play with around the coast lines.

Well, like I said, I'll play with these for a while. You have certainly improved the visibility of the coastlines in the images you used here. Thanks for the information. Much appreciated.

[cartrite]

I am able to get the specmap to load in level2 by defining the "TileSize 64" in the ctx file.

test.jpg

PS I should be able to achieve the same resolution for a normalmap for the USA and a 256k normalmap for the rest of the world between 60 north and 60 south. That would take some doing though. I'm wondering how that would look.

Another shot of some river.

test2.jpg

cartrite