New 16k Moon and 4k Io

Post requests, images, descriptions and reports about work in progress here.
jestr
Posts: 612
Joined: 14.09.2003
With us: 20 years 9 months
Location: Bridgwater,UK

Post #21by jestr » 22.02.2004, 02:41

Dont get your hopes up for a quick download Jack,unfortunately my FTP has upload to you capacity of about 8k/s so if your the only one on line is pretty slow,if there are a few of you it gets split evenly between you's.There is already 'Spec' and 'Normal' maps on the same site.I have them zipped up or in folders so you can maybe download some every day and make AltSurface for it.Jestr

JackHiggins
Posts: 1034
Joined: 16.12.2002
With us: 21 years 6 months
Location: People's Republic Of Cork, Ireland

Post #22by JackHiggins » 22.02.2004, 09:29

Ah- right. :( I forgot that FTP site is pretty slow...

One of my friends actually owns a net cafe with a satellite DSL connection- so hopefully I can get him to download it all bit by bit. (He's been looking for a 64k earth for a long time- I told him there wasn't any so he'll be really impressed to see this!)
- Jack Higgins
Jack's Celestia Add-ons
And visit my Celestia Gallery too!

Buzz
Posts: 264
Joined: 31.01.2002
With us: 22 years 5 months
Location: The Netherlands

Post #23by Buzz » 22.02.2004, 18:19

Sombrehombre,

I have a 32k VT spec map for earth too, see the www link below.

By the way: I agree with your remarks about colouring. Many corrected Blue Marble textures are too pale. The main problem with the Blue Marble texture is the "fluorescent" greens, not the yellows and reds of desert areas. Photographs by astronauts show that vegetation (forest) is very dark green. And the oceans should look blue, not purple or grey. Thanks for the link to arcscience!

Darkmiss
Posts: 1059
Joined: 20.08.2002
With us: 21 years 10 months
Location: London, England

Post #24by Darkmiss » 23.02.2004, 11:23

Don. Edwards wrote:BTW,
I have yet another new 16k texture ready for release very shortly, along with 16k cloudmap if all goes well. :wink:

Don. Edwards



Ohhh! what's new this time Don :?:
CPU- Intel Pentium Core 2 Quad ,2.40GHz
RAM- 2Gb 1066MHz DDR2
Motherboard- Gigabyte P35 DQ6
Video Card- Nvidia GeForce 8800 GTS + 640Mb
Hard Drives- 2 SATA Raptor 10000rpm 150GB
OS- Windows Vista Home Premium 32

Don. Edwards
Posts: 1510
Joined: 07.09.2002
Age: 59
With us: 21 years 9 months
Location: Albany, Oregon

Post #25by Don. Edwards » 24.02.2004, 05:24

Darkmiss,
I have desided to plug-in the shadow-less continental data into the previous texture. This of course will make the use of a really good bumpmap or normalmap imperitive to bring out detial. So it will not be for everyone. I am also tinkering with color values again, but just a little.

Don. Edwards
I am officially a retired member.
I might answer a PM or a post if its relevant to something.

Ah, never say never!!
Past texture releases, Hmm let me think about it

Thanks for your understanding.

Toti
Developer
Posts: 338
Joined: 10.02.2004
With us: 20 years 4 months

Post #26by Toti » 25.02.2004, 03:25

Users with interest in accuracy -or in running Jupiter related scripts- may want to know that in order to match Celestia 1.3.1 central meridian alignment, this remarkable Io texture needs an horizontal shift of 183 pixels "to the right"

Bye :)

Avatar
Cham M
Posts: 4324
Joined: 14.01.2004
Age: 59
With us: 20 years 5 months
Location: Montreal

Post #27by Cham » 25.02.2004, 03:28

How do you do that ?
"Well! I've often seen a cat without a grin", thought Alice; "but a grin without a cat! It's the most curious thing I ever saw in all my life!"

Toti
Developer
Posts: 338
Joined: 10.02.2004
With us: 20 years 4 months

Post #28by Toti » 25.02.2004, 04:47

Cham wrote:How do you do that ?


If you have the GIMP installed, you can use the 'Offset' command under the 'Image->Transforms' menu.
You must select the option 'turn around' or something like this. Or you can use my GIMP script, that accepts input in pixels and degrees.

If you have Photoshop, there must be an offset command also. (but I don't know its name or location)

If you only have a basic image manipulation tool, perhaps you can do it manually. It gets more difficult as image size increases, though.
    1) Select the right-most 183 pixels wide block (there should be a pixel counter on the lowest bar of the program window) and copy it to the clipboard.
    2) Then select all the remaining image (invert selection command, if it exists) and move it 183 pixels to the right.
    3) Finally, paste the clipboard's content and move it to the left until it reaches the image's begining.
    4) Save the image with ANOTHER name. If you make a mistake (most probably, given the manual work) then you can revert to the original image, without having to redownload it.

Bye :)

DaveMc
Posts: 79
Joined: 09.08.2003
With us: 20 years 10 months
Location: Woodinville, WA, USA

Post #29by DaveMc » 25.02.2004, 20:04

Toti wrote:Users with interest in accuracy -or in running Jupiter related scripts- may want to know that in order to match Celestia 1.3.1 central meridian alignment, this remarkable Io texture needs an horizontal shift of 183 pixels "to the right"

If you have the GIMP installed, you can use the 'Offset' command under the 'Image->Transforms' menu. You must select the option 'turn around' or something like this. Or you can use my GIMP script, that accepts input in pixels and degrees.

If you have Photoshop, there must be an offset command also. (but I don't know its name or location)


Thanks for the info Toti. I noticed the shift but was too lazy to figure it out, thought it might have just been that twitch of mine. :lol:

Photoshop does indeed have an offset command. It's found under Filter->Other->Offset. Just enter the number of pixels to offset and set the "Undefined Areas" option to "Wrap Around".

Paint Shop Pro 8 (don't know about earlier versions) also has an offset command. Go to Effects->Image Effects->Offset and enter in the appropriate stuff, "wrap" should also be selected.

Dave

Topic author
sombrehombre
Posts: 24
Joined: 17.12.2003
With us: 20 years 6 months

183 pixels?

Post #30by sombrehombre » 26.02.2004, 08:26

It looks like I did in fact leave a residual offset in my published texture. My base texture, to which everything else was aligned, was the uncompressed version of this:

Global mosaic of Voyager hi-res and med-res images of Io, resampled to 16 pixels per degree or 1.99 km/pixel, size 5760 x 2880 pixels. From Tony Rosanova at USGS Flagstaff. Longitude range 360 - 0 degrees, latitude range 90 - -90 degrees.
http://www.lowell.edu/users/ijw/maps/iomaphires.jpg

My understanding is that this is the most geometrically refined global mosaic of Io, and substantially geomerically better than the orange/violet Voyager color mosaics most textures are based on. I did my best to align the positions of everything else (the 3 Galileo low-res projovian color fragments and the high-res antijovian hemisphere) to this (this is NOT easy without more speciallized cartographic software), while aligning the colors of everything to that of the high-res true-color anti jovian hemisphere imaged by Galileo.

Checking 6 different features against Tony Rosanova's mosaic above, it appears that 0 longitude is between pixel (GIMP ordering) of 1871 and 1872 from the seam, whereas it should occur between pixels 2047 and 2048.

That indicates an offset to the right (East) by 176 pixels is actually correct. It would technically be better to do a pixel correct adjustment at my working resolution of 16 pixels/degree (5760 across), but unfortunately, that version has been lost to an overambitious disk-drive cleanup. I decided it wasn't quite good enough for an 8k Io.

:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

I have made a correction to offset the Io textures to the East by 176 pixels, and am currently uploading that corrected versions as both .png and .dds to the website http://laika.012webpages.com/celestia. Thanks to Toti for identifying this error.

:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

If you still think its 7 pixels (about half a degree) off, I disclaim copyright to this work, and you are free to do whatever gets you through the night with it.

TERRIER
Posts: 717
Joined: 29.04.2003
With us: 21 years 2 months
Location: West Yorkshire, England

Re: 183 pixels?

Post #31by TERRIER » 26.02.2004, 11:50

sombrehombre wrote:I have made a correction to offset the Io textures to the East by 176 pixels, and am currently uploading that corrected versions as both .png and .dds to the website http://laika.012webpages.com/celestia. Thanks to Toti for identifying this error.

If you still think its 7 pixels (about half a degree) off, I disclaim copyright to this work, and you are free to do whatever gets you through the night with it.


Thanks for your speedy work in correcting the texture.
1.6.0:AMDAth1.2GHz 1GbDDR266:Ge6200 256mbDDR250:WinXP-SP3:1280x1024x32FS:v196.21@AA4x:AF16x:IS=HQ:T.Buff=ON Earth16Kdds@15KkmArctic2000AD:FOV1:SPEC L5dds:NORM L5dxt5:CLOUD L5dds:
NIGHT L5dds:MOON L4dds:GALXY ON:MAG 15.2-SAP:TIME 1000x:RP=OGL2:10.3FPS

Toti
Developer
Posts: 338
Joined: 10.02.2004
With us: 20 years 4 months

Post #32by Toti » 26.02.2004, 17:56

Sombrehombre:

There is no error at all.
The alignment problem is really easy to correct (and most people aren't interested in it, anyway). My above post was not intended to despise your (highly precise and methodical) work at all, but to give a hint on how to align the texture with respect to Celestia 1.3.1 standards.

The shift of 183 pixels -as I wrote in my post- is incorrect. There is too much difference when changing alt surfaces at low altitudes (I can't believe that I didn't check it this way). :oops:
I arrived at this value by comparing your 4K Io with an upscaled-to-4K version of the "Celestia Io" at the small "bridge/peninsula" in Loki Patera. Not the best method: with such a low resolution frame, a lot of measurement error is involved.

I tested your 176 pixel value and it is much more accurate.

Keep your excellent work
Bye :)

Avatar
Jeam Tag M
Posts: 540
Joined: 01.04.2003
Age: 60
With us: 21 years 3 months
Location: Southern suburb, Paris, France

Post #33by Jeam Tag » 26.02.2004, 18:38

Toti wrote:Sombrehombre: There is no error at all. The alignment problem is really easy to correct (and most people aren't interested in it, anyway).

Hello: don't forget that even a LITTLE missalignement with the current version of Celestia may show curious informations when your turn the locations on, have a look on an AltSurface, use VT's, and so on :wink: :!:
So, even with my poor computer i find this Io texture superb, SombreHombre, thanks. Jeam
Catalogue des ajouts /Catalog for the Add-Ons in French
...PAGES LOSTS, SORRY

Bob Hegwood
Posts: 1048
Joined: 19.10.2003
With us: 20 years 8 months
Location: Germantown, Ohio - USA

Post #34by Bob Hegwood » 26.02.2004, 18:56

Right you are Jeam...

As I found out recently while working with the SaturnTour script, if your locations are off as little as 5 degrees in longitude (Maybe 10 pixels on the image I was working on), you're location markers are going to identify the wrong feature on a surface. The Central Meridian alignment must be correct in order to properly identify the features on a planetary object. :wink:

Take care, Bob
Bob Hegwood
Windows XP-SP2, 256Meg 1024x768 Resolution
Intel Celeron 1400 MHz CPU
Intel 82815 Graphics Controller
OpenGL Version: 1.1.2 - Build 4.13.01.3196
Celestia 1.4.0 Pre6 FT1

DaveMc
Posts: 79
Joined: 09.08.2003
With us: 20 years 10 months
Location: Woodinville, WA, USA

Re: 183 pixels?

Post #35by DaveMc » 26.02.2004, 19:23

sombrehombre wrote:That indicates an offset to the right (East) by 176 pixels is actually correct.......


That's what I also found.

Dave


Return to “Add-on development”