Celestia Forums

Post Deleted

Yes, I coded the CustomTemplate feature in Celestia a long time ago. I am always happy to see it being actually used by people! For add-on creators with a sense of reality, it is important to orient the CustomTemplate image properly. Otherwise the rendered image will become incorrect.

For the MilkyWay, one should always overlay Selden's Pulsar add-on that nicely traces the ACTUAL position of the MilkyWay arms. Here is a reminder for Newcomers:


The green cross marks the sun's position in Orion's arm of the MW. The line from there to the center of the MW corresponds to zero galactic longitude.

The sideways views also confirm the thickness profile of our MilkyWay from the scatter of the pulsar locations! The yellow crosses mark the precise location of the galactic plane whence the perfect alignment of the Celestia MilkyWay becomes obvious...


The second image shows sideways views of the alignment quality where the top and bottom images differ by a 90 degree rotation within the galactic plane. Look for the sun's position...

Fridger

K...

Nice, how about the andromeda?

i know my custom template arm position is wrong! and now, i searching for the "correct" Custom template

Andromeda custom template is from Whirpool Galaxy map.

is it right?

So, where i can download that selden addon???

Celestial234 wrote:K...

Nice, how about the andromeda?

i know my custom template arm position is wrong! and now, i searching for the "correct" Custom template

Andromeda custom template is from Whirpool Galaxy map.

is it right?

As to a much improved rendering of galaxies (including M31) , I have done a lot of (OpenGL) coding work for my forthcoming celestia.Sci software. Here is a brief summary of what celestia.Sci will be about.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=10578&start=102

Notably have a look at celestia.Sci's splash image displaying both NGC 3226 and NGC3227. So you can see both the rendering of elliptical and spiral galaxies. A proper color rendering (using various standard color profiles) is another highlight of that code...

The complete set of 10000+ NGC and IC galaxies is rendered by computer directly from the published scientific catalogs.

Three further examples in comparison with the SDSS ( = Sloan Digital Sky Survey) photographic images

[Click on images by all means!]





Note the different matching shades of color (based on the SDSS color profile).

Fridger

Celestial234 wrote:So, where i can download that selden addon???

Presumably in the Motherlode (which I don't frequent). Anyway, here is a link to his pulsar archive

http://www.lepp.cornell.edu/~seb/celest ... ars_v2.zip

Fridger

Great, and wow! it's very beautiful! maybe i have to wait until the version 1.7.0 released? or 1.8.0

Celestial234 wrote:OH MY?!?! VERY VERY BEAUTIFUL! THAT'S WHAT I WAIT!
CELESTIA SCI!
I TRYIN' TO MAKE THE REALISTIC MODEL ON VERSION 1.6.1. so, i wait for the MOSTLY colorful model!
...how to you get that picture... are you have it? if you have it,

Ugh, got depress again, Addon mission: Failed.

Good you like it. The method via add-ons is only suitable for modifications of just a few galaxies. The real thing is to render many thousands without human interference. That in turn requires plenty of C++ coding using OpenGL as a 3d (cross platform) rendering toolkit.

There are many things to learn in case of interest. Fortunately, there are many tutorials in the net that help a LOT.

Fridger

ok... now i make a "Better resolution" of milky way. maybe it's look weird , i uses Gaussian blur slur spread and pick and gradient light to make this . See this.

maybe you like it.


To download just right click on the picture and click "save target as" to you celestia/model directory
Default: C:/Program files/Celestia/Models
It's the default.

Enjoy.

-Celest

Not bad for a start! Here is the display of your modified MW template within celestia:

[Click on images]


I think you should add carefully some small pixel noise in-between the spiral arms. You need to use quite dark grey noise and best use another layer for that. Designing good templates is kind of an art

Here is a close-up check of your template, as to the correct placement of the sun (red marker) and the locations of the celestia stars. You can see that the stars would provide for some pixel noise in-between the main arms.


Here is an old thread of mine "Joint Galaxy Template Design Effort" that you might find useful.
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=10135

I was thinking that you just overlay some pixel layer as indicated there...

Fridger

t00fri wrote:Not bad for a start!

Thank you, this is the first time i make a "Re-Edit" addon.

Before, i make the addon "Rhea ring" but the hypothesis is rejected.
this one... the older one is in wrong possition and the newer one i must carefull...

Thank you!

-Celest

what?! no problem with mine, the noises visible.
Hm... Weird...

See this, the model's the same, and the noise...


Idk what happen with yours. but my model on your celestia, MW core is look brighter and better than mine! ?!?!

-Celest

Celestial234 wrote:what?! no problem with mine, the noises visible.
Hm... Weird...


Well, what I used was NOT the standard Celestia-1.6.1 code, since I was interested how your template looks with an improved galaxy rendering code...

See this, the model's the same, and the noise...


Idk what happen with yours. but my model on your celestia, MW core is look brighter and better than mine! ?!?!

-Celest

Correct. With the official Celestia-1.6.1 I was able to confirm the visibility of your noise. When rendering your template with my improved code, the noise needs to be somewhat stronger (brighter).

I noted that you have increased the MW template size from the default of 128x128 to 256x256. This you can do, but then you have to also modify the hardcoded values of width=128 and height=128 appropriately in my galaxy.cpp code! Any modification in the Celestia code requires a recompilation. I advise to remain with 128x128, since the effect on the rendering is small. A different size would force a Celestia recompilation by all users of your add-on...

I also noted that your MilkyWay.png is identical in shape to my original one. You just applied a Gaussian blur filter to it. Correct?

Fridger

No, i resized it, then i do gaussian blur and then i use the feature in GIMP
Noise: Slur, Spread, and pick.

aren't you know?

UPDATE TO DOWNLOAD RIGHT CLICK THEN CLICK SAVE PICTURE AS (mine is New IE 9)

-Celest

Ok... Let's try this model

NOISES ARE BRIGHTER



right click, save picture as to save
or
Right click, save target as

i use new I-E9

Celestial234 wrote::cry:
No, i resized it, then i do gaussian blur and then i use the feature in GIMP
Noise: Slur, Spread, and pick.

aren't you know?

But apart from trivial operations it's what I said: forget about your rescaling because it is not correct (at this stage). Then you did a Gaussian blur filter. OK and finally you added some noise, which I forgot to mention explicitly.

In principle you could have started from scratch and do a completely new MW design. I basicallly meant to say that this approach was not taken.

Fridger

Celestial234 wrote:Ok... Let's try this model

NOISES ARE BRIGHTER

MilkyWay.png

right click, save picture as to save
or
Right click, save target as

i use new I-E9

I think it goes into the right direction with the stronger noises. However, in my view a lot more careful thinning of the noises towards the galactic periphery is required to make it look really nice and realistic.

Fridger