Pluto

[jim]

Hi all,

Here is my version of Pluto. The texture based still on Ganymede's one. The little pics in the upper left corner show my map and a colorized real pluto map. I hope there is a bit likeness .



Many things are unknown about Pluto but I found this interesting statement:

"Pluto is the second most contrasty body in the Solar System (after Iapetus)."
http://seds.lpl.arizona.edu/nineplanets ... pluto.html

The zip includes a 2k JPG map and a bump map and can be downloaded here:

http://www.celestiaproject.net/~jim/files/pluto2k.zip (415KB)

Bye Jens

[Darkmiss]

So Don, when will your Pluto Central be up and running?

[fsgregs]

Don, your texture surfaces look very good but the latest ones seem to have picked up that reddish tint again. The one you posted Saturday night on the forum matches the NASA photos closely in color, but the new ones posted on Sunday appear redder again.

Also, if Jim's blurred thumbnail of Pluto shows that kind of change in color depth and variation, I would have to agree that Pluto might need a bit more color variation on its surface to better match what Jim did with the Ganymede texture.



Frank

[Don. Edwards]

Yah it keeps going to the red side of things. I am going to retouch it some. Hopefully I can get the color back to were it belongs.

[praesepe]

Okay people, here's another try with the Pluto texture, this time blending the Pluto albedo map with a 2k Triton texture and then recolorising it a bit. I've also added some random craters and dust/scratches to the main texture to make it look better. Here are the screenshots:

[fsgregs]

Praesepe"

A really nice job. The texture looks very real, and the colors certainly do match the NASA photos. Can you add some bump to it? I'd also toss in some cracks and more craters. I agree with a prior thread that Pluto is probably very pockmarked with impacts and since it is so far out, the odds are lower than impact melting has filled in its craters. Given its size and the absence of tidal flex from a neighboring body such as Jupiter (which causes Io to be so volcanic), I would also suspect little volcanism, so its surface is probably a bit rougher than you've got it. Add some cracks and more craters and I'd say you GOT IT!!

Frank

[praesepe]

Praesepe"

A really nice job. The texture looks very real, and the colors certainly do match the NASA photos. Can you add some bump to it? I'd also toss in some cracks and more craters. I agree with a prior thread that Pluto is probably very pockmarked with impacts and since it is so far out, the odds are lower than impact melting has filled in its craters. Given its size and the absence of tidal flex from a neighboring body such as Jupiter (which causes Io to be so volcanic), I would also suspect little volcanism, so its surface is probably a bit rougher than you've got it. Add some cracks and more craters and I'd say you GOT IT!!

Frank

Thanks!

Okay, I've added a large collection of craters and added some kind of bumpmap I've also retuned the colours, so now it's a bit rouger.
As usual, comments are welcome

[Don. Edwards]

Well there seems to be a glut of Pluto texture creators lately. As far as I am consered praesepe's texture is the best so far but, I would just bleed off a little more red and you should have it. I will make my finaly attempt available for download but I don't feel I will be doing any further updates. I have other things to work on. I am going to post the following pictures to show what I did. You will see my textures color I feel finaly got closer than my past works. Also the contrast between the light and dark areas has been inhanced. So have a look.






And finally the last texture with the specmap enabled.



You can download the texture and do what you please with it. I will be replacinjg the older texture with this one.
Sorry Darkmiss there will not be a Pluto Central......
So you can download it here. http://63.224.48.65/~impulse/Pluto_concept4.zip

[fsgregs]

Don:

This texture is beautiful. Its color looks good and it has lots of reality to it.

Above, Fridger provided a Pluto texture that is actually the blurred photo of Pluto from Earth, color corrected. There is talk on this thread of making that the default Pluto texture for Celestia. I have to respectfully disagree. If the goal is to provide the public with the most accurate image of what Pluto most likely looks like, I can say with certainty that it does not look like a blur. It has a crisp surface probably covered with craters or ice cracks or both. What causes its dramatic changes in albedo can be food for a good discussion, but Pluto clearly is not a blur. Since Celestia travels in space, we can go to Pluto and look at it close up. That is one of the beauties of this program. To give an image to the public of a blurred blob in space is just as much inaccurate as providing them with a crisp image that may be fictional but is based on best guesses. Your texture, Jim's texture and Praesepe's textures all do that to differing degrees.

In summary, if Celestia was simulating the view of Pluto from an Earth based telescope, then by all means Fridger's texture is a good choice. Celestia, however, takes us there and the planet should not be a blur. I would vote for one of the three other choices above as the default Pluto texture in the next Celestia release. They all make a good estimate of what it probably looks like.

Thank everyone for the effort. Honestly, this program just keeps getting better and better.

Frank

[t00fri]

Don:

This texture is beautiful. Its color looks good and it has lots of reality to it.

Above, Fridger provided a Pluto texture that is actually the blurred photo of Pluto from Earth, color corrected. There is talk on this thread of making that the default Pluto texture for Celestia. I have to respectfully disagree. If the goal is to provide the public with the most accurate image of what Pluto most likely looks like, I can say with certainty that it does not look like a blur. It has a crisp surface probably covered with craters or ice cracks or both. What causes its dramatic changes in albedo can be food for a good discussion, but Pluto clearly is not a blur. Since Celestia travels in space, we can go to Pluto and look at it close up. That is one of the beauties of this program. To give an image to the public of a blurred blob in space is just as much inaccurate as providing them with a crisp image that may be fictional but is based on best guesses. Your texture, Jim's texture and Praesepe's textures all do that to differing degrees.

In summary, if Celestia was simulating the view of Pluto from an Earth based telescope, then by all means Fridger's texture is a good choice. Celestia, however, takes us there and the planet should not be a blur. I would vote for one of the three other choices above as the default Pluto texture in the next Celestia release. They all make a good estimate of what it probably looks like.

Thank everyone for the effort. Honestly, this program just keeps getting better and better.

Frank :)

Frank:

I have meanwhile committed my Pluto-Charon textures to the CVS encouraged by Chris and Grant. I think that given the serious limitation in texture sizes in the default archive, the present solution is indeed the best. Also all depends from which distance or with which resolution you look at Pluto-Charon. The texture information I have collected and incorporated, contains of course much more than just a 'blurred photo' from earth. It involves both ingenious and most accurate 'eclipse photometry' conducted over more than 5 years! The direct HST images could never cope with this...

Even if you or anybody else finds Don's, Presepe's or anybody else's attempts more "plausible" or "probable", you should not forget that NOBODY has ever been 'out there', NOBODY has ever 'seen' more than what is expressed by the resolution I have incorporated!

Therefore, I find it is a good /default basis/ to start from what is /really known/...

Of course everyone is free to replace the default textures by some of the nice attempts in this department.

Bye Fridger

[granthutchison]

I would vote for one of the three other choices above as the default Pluto texture in the next Celestia release.

Ah, but Frank, it's not that easy. You, personally, have to choose just one - you have to say to jim or praesepe or Don, "Your interpretation is the best, and you other two, sorry, you're less good." But that's just complete nonsense, because no-one knows what Pluto looks like close too, and all of them have provided beautiful textures.
So why not leave these lovely things, like so many other lovely things, as fictional add-ons to Celestia? And everyone can then choose which version of reality they would prefer. But all we know of reality is summarized in Fridger's texture (me, I'd strip out the various faint surface markings and leave it a real blur, admittedly). So that's why I suggested it be used as the default texture - not because it's beautiful (it's not), not because it's detailed (of course it's not) and certainly not because it Fridger's (to a large extent, as I'm sure he would agree, it's not), but because it's just precisely as accurate as we can get right now.
Otherwise, the logical extension of your view is that we provide every star in Celestia with its own highly detailed planets and moons, because probably they look pretty much like that, to some extent, maybe ...

Grant

[praesepe]

Well, I think this will be my last version of my Pluto, I've retouched the last texture and made it a bit rouger and added a little more of bump. If there are no more corrections to do, I'll be uploading it asap.

[Don. Edwards]

praesepe,
What resolution is your texture? To me it looks like it might be a 4k texture. If its not 4k it sure could pass for one. I like it allot and I may just use it myself as the default Pluto texture on my install. I would just ease just a little more red out again. If you have Photoshop or gimp you might consider adding just a little yellow in there. That might just do the trick. But I think it’s ready for release. I think I just may use my Pluto texture in the HD 28185 system instead. But of course anyone can use it where ever they want.

Grant,
As far as anyone choosing which texture is better, how would any of us even know which texture is getting more use. A pole would have to be taken. I frankly don't really care who uses what. Look what I said above. I will end up using praesepe's Pluto texture simply because he was able to get more detail into it and I need to keep working on other things.

Don.

[praesepe]

praesepe,
What resolution is your texture? To me it looks like it might be a 4k texture. If its not 4k it sure could pass for one. I like it allot and I may just use it myself as the default Pluto texture on my install. I would just ease just a little more red out again. If you have Photoshop or gimp you might consider adding just a little yellow in there. That might just do the trick.

Hey Don,

Glad you like my texture! It's a 2k PNG with the consequent 2k spec and bump maps. About the color, well, I am going to try to tune it a little bit again by adding yellow and see how it goes, I've got to admit that this coloring process its gonna make me crazy hehe.

Thanks for the advice!

[praesepe]

How about this? I've retouched the colours in order to make them a bit yellow.

[Don. Edwards]

praesepe,
The color values look about right. Might I suggest just a slight reduction of the saturation level and think you have got it. Of course it could just be me. I won't know until I try it on my system.

Don.

[fsgregs]

Boy, ....

OK, one last time into the breach, as the saying goes!

Grant, Fridger and others:

Celestia is not a program designed to show us the planets from the viewpoint of Earth. We have telescopes for that. No ... to me ... the beauty of this amazing program is its ability to take us there ... to go where no man has gone before .... in one of the most detailed and visually stunning ways that can be devised. It is so good that NASA is considering its use in IMAX theatres around the world and in space museums.

Now, candidly, if you were a space passenger riding that spaceship in Celestia and being taken to Pluto (by pressing that "Go to" button), you would expect to see, you would hope to see ... you would WANT to see a planet that looks real. I hope we can reasonably agree that Pluto is a solid world with rocks, ice and craters. How many are there? Don't know! Does it have cracks in its ice like Ganymede? Don't yet know. But what we do know is that up close and personal, it is a brownish world with crisp texture, probably of craters and cracks and rocks and ice. It clearly does not look like a blurred image from Earth. It has features, not blobs of color.

That is what we owe the Celestia user .. our passengers ... on their journey through the heart of the Celestia matrix. We owe them as close to visual reality as we can get. In the case of Pluto, we have corrected a lavender/blue texture that for over a year was the default texture. It was nice but the wrong color. Now at least, we have improved upon it with some meaningful thought and artwork.

For the sake of all those visitors who will not know how to get add-ons and do not read the forum ... for all the thousands of people who will be downloading the Celestia default in the future, please lets give them a Pluto worthy of a visit. If it takes a bit of artistic license, so what? A crisp texture is still more true to life than a blurred one. Frankly, it makes no difference which of the three crisp textures we use, but not to use one of them is to do a disservice to all of us who are going to space for the beauty and awe of it, as well as the accuracy of it.

Frank

[billybob884]

For some strange reason I'm tempted to shout "Amen!"

[Darkmiss]

how would any of us even know which texture is getting more use. A pole would have to be taken.

Please don't do that!
this sort of thing could be harmfull to the texture creators, if there texture comes last, in a poll.

I just think it is great to have such a talented bunch of artists here.
and such a great array of textures to choose from.

each of you strive to get the perfect realistic texture, but each texture seems to endup with subtle diferences.
but when it comes to textures like pluto, your individual diferences shine.

so lets not worry to much about who gets the most use.
and enjoy the rich quality you all produce.

If you all made the same texture, there wouldn't be any choice.

I love Fridgers idear of a texture, of nothing more than we can currently see. (Realistic)
but i also like the textures with added imagination too,
I am useing both, in different res directorys, so I can switch between them.

[t00fri]

Boy, .... :roll:

OK, one last time into the breach, as the saying goes!

Grant, Fridger and others:

Celestia is not a program designed to show us the planets from the viewpoint of Earth. We have telescopes for that. No ... to me ... the beauty of this amazing program is its ability to take us there ... to go where no man has gone before .... in one of the most detailed and visually stunning ways that can be devised. It is so good that NASA is considering its use in IMAX theatres around the world and in space museums.

Now, candidly, if you were a space passenger riding that spaceship in Celestia and being taken to Pluto (by pressing that "Go to" button), you would expect to see, you would hope to see ... you would WANT to see a planet that looks real. I hope we can reasonably agree that Pluto is a solid world with rocks, ice and craters. How many are there? Don't know! Does it have cracks in its ice like Ganymede? Don't yet know. But what we do know is that up close and personal, it is a brownish world with crisp texture, probably of craters and cracks and rocks and ice. It clearly does not look like a blurred image from Earth. It has features, not blobs of color.

That is what we owe the Celestia user .. our passengers ... on their journey through the heart of the Celestia matrix. We owe them as close to visual reality as we can get. In the case of Pluto, we have corrected a lavender/blue texture that for over a year was the default texture. It was nice but the wrong color. Now at least, we have improved upon it with some meaningful thought and artwork.

For the sake of all those visitors who will not know how to get add-ons and do not read the forum ... for all the thousands of people who will be downloading the Celestia default in the future, please lets give them a Pluto worthy of a visit. If it takes a bit of artistic license, so what? A crisp texture is still more true to life than a blurred one. Frankly, it makes no difference which of the three crisp textures we use, but not to use one of them is to do a disservice to all of us who are going to space for the beauty and awe of it, as well as the accuracy of it.

Frank

Frank,

I can see you are already thinking in terms of all those people
queuing for Celestia in NASA's visitor park...

The medal also has another side though. So far, Celestia has been
designed by all the people invoked in its coding, to attempt
/utmost scientific accuracy/ that is possible with affordable resources,
/blended/ with exciting 3d graphics. With this basic philosophy,
Celestia is not only attractive for 10-13 year old school
children (dreaming of becoming astronauts one day) but to a much larger
community including even (grown-up) scientists.

This underlying philosophy has consistently been pursued by Chris and
all of the other developers. For example, Chris spent a large amount
of time typing in all those VSOP87 orbits with hundreds of terms! Once
you give up the foremost aim of astronomical precision, Chris could
really have saved himself a lot of time using simple Keplerian orbits
adorned with all the phantasy from your "science park visitors"...

Analogous arguments hold for the rest of the developers. Grant, myself
and others checked and improved orbits with extreme care, adjusted
texture offsets, discussed mutual precision events
of various bodies etc...And now we should just give this consistent
philosphy up...? Is it that what you ask for?

Look at the most amazing displays of "astronomical precision events"
by Calculus ...Is'nt it just amazing?

Let me tell you that today I have committed a Pluto-Charon texture
/upgrade/ to CVS: I have even further 'purified' my textures and taken
out those surface markings I had inadequately borrowed from
Triton...;-)

Finally, let me suggest another "line of attack" for you:
If you are so dissatisfied with the scientifically /correct/ information
that entered the Pluto-Charon textures, why don't you fight for a
less boring Neptune and Uranus, too?? Do you really believe Neptune looks so
uniformly blue on close distance as in the default texture?;-)


Please remember that due to its flexible design, Celestia can easily
be transformed into an assemly of virtual worlds etc. But if we give
up to strive for precision in the future, something /essential/ will
be lost for ever!

Bye Fridger