Pictures from Celestia

[Cham]

An Orion-like stellar nursery in the making

Orion1.jpg

Orion2.jpg

This is no-texture-on-a-mesh ! Fully volumetric all-sprites nebula.

EDIT : Another nebula prototype...

Nebula.jpg

[kristoffer]

The 2 newly discovered brown dwarfs, only 6.5 light-years from our Sun.

[Cham]

A star fell ill and exploded !

remnant.jpg

[Cham]

A family of five irregular nebulae :

irregular.jpg

These 3D models are great with stars inside, and placed in the galactic arms.

Here's a movie of one of them :
http://fsgregs.startlogic.com/Public_Fi ... ebula3.mov

[Cham]

A Mega Orion-like nebula ! (the stars aren't placed yet)

mega1.jpg

mega2.jpg

mega3.jpg

[Cham]

Huge nebulae in M33

Large1.jpg

Large2.jpg

Large3.jpg

[Cham]

More views :

nuage1.jpg

nuage2.jpg

nuage3.jpg

[Cham]

This picture isn't from Celestia. This topic is about pictures taken within Celestia, so you're OFF-topic.

[Cham]

This picture isn't from Celestia.

what motivates you to say that ?

It is evident. Don't take people for idiots ! This is enough for a ban.

Or else, prove it by showing the corners info on your picture, with maybe other Celestia elements (stars, galaxies...) !

[Cham]

An experiment that turned out to be beautifull :

jewel1.jpg

jewel2.jpg

jewel3.jpg

[Cham]

The galactic core of NGC 404, with thousands of stars :

NGC404GC1.jpg

NGC404GC2.jpg

The model have been designed to match Celestia's galaxies rendering.
A view with the galaxies rendering turned OFF :

NGC404GC3.jpg

[t00fri]

So I got curious how NGC 404 would look like in celestia.Sci in visible light. Here is the result along with a Hubble photo of NGC 404 (note I am using the SDSS color profile, while the Hubble profile is rather different):

celestia.Sci (far away view):

n404.jpg

Hubble photo,


celestia.Sci (close-up view):

n404_close.jpg

Fridger

[Cham]

To get an idea of reality, here are 2 photos of NGC-404 (visible & UV).

NGC404.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GALEX

Very different from the images above no ?

The picture that you're showing us clearly state that it's in the UV wavelenght band. In the visible (left part of the picture), we see nothing ! (the bright orange spot on the left is just a star, not the galaxy itself). So there is no contradiction with my model.

Secondly, my NGC 404 nebula model is only the central core, not the entire galaxy, which is still represented as a lenticular (S0) in Celestia.

And thirdly, your picture isn't showing a close-up of the central core.

NGC 404 is a very small galaxy, and we can't see its central core with our current technology. So we are still free to represent it in any way we like.

[t00fri]

While the GALEX photo also shows NGC 404 in visible light (on the left) one should note that the orange color is NOT a real color, since a monocromatic DSS image was displayed. These are all orange colored . In contrast, the Hubble image I have shown for comparison represents a true color display (given the Hubble filters...)

Fridger

[t00fri]

...and since I am at it... here is a neat Sa galaxy, NGC 4698, in celestia.Sci:

[click on image by all means!]

n4698.jpg

Enjoy,
Fridger

[Cham]

...and since I am at it... here is a neat Sa galaxy, NGC 4698, in celestia.Sci:

[click on image by all means!]

n4698.jpg

That's very nice. You should put this picture in the irregular nebula topic at CM, to illustrate the "granulity" I was talking about.

[t00fri]

...and since I am at it... here is a neat Sa galaxy, NGC 4698, in celestia.Sci:

[click on image by all means!]

n4698.jpg

That's very nice. You should put this picture in the irregular nebula topic at CM, to illustrate the "granulity" I was talking about.

That was actually the reason why I shot the image 2 days ago . Let's see when I get around starting the discussion at CM...

Fridger

[Cham]

You're saying that this is science fiction !
OHHHH the ugly boy...

So this is not the good topic to deliver all your photos ?

After reading this kind of stupid comments, I'm now asking myself why should I continue to publish anything on this lame forum.
Why should I give any addons to disrespectful idiots like you ? So you don't like 3D nebulae ? Okay no problem, just forget about them.

I have enough of this moronic board. I'm leaving.

[Fenerit]

You're saying that this is science fiction !
OHHHH the ugly boy...

So this is not the good topic to deliver all your photos ?
You had to choose this one: "Re: Custom Science-Fiction Pictures from Celestia" at :
http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic ... 1e9467536e

From Wiki (sci-fi search):

The settings for science fiction are often contrary to consensus reality, but most science fiction relies on a considerable degree of suspension of disbelief, which is facilitated in the reader's mind by potential scientific explanations or solutions to various fictional elements

There is no "suspension of disbelief" in believing that within NGC404 there can be several nebulae generated through the usual scientific ways with which they are generated, having proofs that nebulae exists within other galaxies now. On the other hand, there is no proof that faster-than-light ST/SW vessels exists now; thus there is the "suspension of disbelief" for what concern their existence "long time ago, in a far far away galaxy". Cham's works on sprites is a straightforward approach to get 3D nebuale as closest as possible to their real shape and Shatters.net is not Facebook, Twitter or similar devices for children mass-brain deseases.

[Fenerit]

Why not distribute cocaine saying it is sugar powder...

Sorry, I do not agree. If the potential matter for the possibly existence of nebulae within NGC-404 were independent from its form, it should be constituted by gas/dust components like our nebulae; being its form, by the way, just the part that you considers fictional even though you must admit that sugar and coca matches their form but not their matter. Could you tell me what matter and form matches an unexistent sci-fi object aside the book's paper or the movie's film?