Release: The Billow Maidens V2

[rthorvald]

... Finally got it online, just now. The website has gotten a major overhaul, too.



Ran: The Billow Maidens V2

This is not an update - it is an expansion on the original idea.
So, if someone downloaded V1 and wonders if it is worth the bandwidth,
there?s a ton of new stuff in there, along with a bugfix or two.

The solar system is basically the same, but several textures have been
tuned up, in some cases with higher resolution. I have tinkered with
most of the models, too, and fine-tuned the orbits. New spacecraft,
buildings and locations have been added, to make the scenario somewhat
deeper.

This add-on is twice as big as the original. So i have split it up into four
separate downloads, where each part expands on the previous one...
This means the first download is a complete add-on by itself, while other
parts just add detail.

Thanks to:
- Selden, for all your help
- Fsgregs, for your inspiring critique of V1
- Jestr, for your help with the Orion in V1
- Fridger, for use of your cloudmap
- Maxim, for converting a ton of jpgs to dds
- Christophe, for testing V1

More info, download links and screenshots on my website.
Feedback and criticism appreciated.

- rthorvald

[Evil Dr Ganymede]

Wow. It astounds me that this is all done in Celestia...
Awesome stuff - I'll download it tonight

[Dollan]

Holy crap. I am literally speechless. I cannot wait to download this tonight at work (my home connection is faster, but for some reason it can never complete a large download). The big bummer is that I'll still have to wait until the next day sometime to install it and play with it, since the only computer I have that can successfully run Celestia is here at home.

This is just... just amazing.

...John...

[alphap1us]

You haven't felt wonder until you have seen the Bawor skylight. That thing is amazing. Once again, you outdo yourself rthorvald.

-Joe

[jestr]

Very beautiful work Runar,love the wubs,and the website,Jestr

[Evil Dr Ganymede]

Looks awesome now that I've downloaded it...

I may be being blind here, but is there a "tour script" that shows off all the cool features? I just downloaded Part 1 of the addon and looked at the URLs provided with that.

BTW, what was the final verdict on whether or not the nebula could be a light source? We can simulate another light source for that now can't we, if we add a second star that's in the same position relative to Ran as the nebula is...

[Evil Dr Ganymede]

I'm going to have to apologise profusely to Runar for making a bit of a mess with his rather fine add-on... but here's my very crude effort at making a light source for the nebula. You'll have to replace the ran.stc file in the data directory of the addon with this, and it only works on 1.4.0pre5, AFAIK:

Code: Select all

Barycenter "Ran"
{
RA 270.674708333333   
Dec -23.1049444444444   
Distance 5229.982
}

297297 "The Billow Maidens" # component A
{
OrbitBarycenter "Ran"
SpectralType "G2V"
AppMag  15.7
Radius 809001
Oblateness 0.009

EllipticalOrbit {
   Period              1e10
        SemiMajorAxis       1e-10
           }
Atmosphere {
   Height 1425410
   Lower [ 0.8 0.75 0.65 ]
   Upper [ 0.6 0.55 0.45 ]
   Sky [  0.8 0.4 0.1 ]
      }
Obliquity 12.55
}

"Trifidstar" # component B
{
OrbitBarycenter "Ran"
SpectralType "F0V"
AppMag 17.0

        EllipticalOrbit {
                Period           1e10
                SemiMajorAxis     100
      Inclination       15
                MeanAnomaly        105
        }
}


I tried to plonk a star in the right place relative to Ran, to make it look like the nebula was providing illumination. Not entirely convinced that it works well (especially when you speed up time - it's probably too close to the system and you get severe parallax errors when looking at the "trifidstar" from the outer planets as they go round their orbit). But there you go anyway... it's crude and nasty, but it kinda works - take it or leave it .

[rthorvald]

is there a "tour script" that shows off all the cool features?

No, not yet. I am looking into it, but i haven?t got any experience with cel scripting, so that one will take some time... If anyone else are interested in doing something about that, i will be happy to help, though

That, and the problem with CelUrls on OSX 1.3.2 is the main reason for the Chronology; it will point you to a few key points, at least.

what was the final verdict on whether or not the nebula could be a light source?

I think Grant proved to us that the nebula would be quite invisible that close up. Too bad... I?ll leave it to the user to decide if they want it or not. The stars that comes with it is a nice addition anyway, as there aren?t much else to see in Celestia, that far out.

I'm going to have to apologise [...] making a light source for the nebula. You'll have to replace the ran.stc file in the data directory of the addon with this, and it only works on 1.4.0pre5

Hum, no apologies neccecary! It would be nice to have a light source
However, i?m on a Mac, so i cannot see what you have done. How about a screenshot?

-rthorvald

[maxim]

BTW, what was the final verdict on whether or not the nebula could be a light source? We can simulate another light source for that now can't we, if we add a second star that's in the same position relative to Ran as the nebula is...

A world that resides inside a nebula should receive ambient lighting from it, not directional IMHO.
I think you'll have to convince Chris to add color parametration for celestias ambient light settings to adress the nebula color.

maxim

[Evil Dr Ganymede]

screenshot...



This is a view looking over the Ran system, toward the nebula. The star with the marker around it is the "trifidstar" that provides illumination - it's between the system and the nebula.

I guess Maxim is right though, we should just use Ambient light for this. And if Grant is right then we shouldn't even see anything at all...

[maxim]

Did Grant say 'invisible' or 'optically transparent' - I don't remember the thread.

I think it should be optically transparent, but emitting at least the same amount of light as seen from far away. Anyhow this may not be very much as it's spread over the whole sky. I would suggest an ambient light level of about 15% (slighly reddish - but that doesn't work of course).

maxim

[bh]

Bloody Hell!...great stuff rthorvald...This will keep me busy for years!

Regards...bh.

[fsgregs]

NUTS!!!

Dear Runar:

First, I want to thank you for all of the incredible work you've done on RAN II. Celestia has needed this kind of add-on for years. Although the program draws space objects beautifully, close-up planet textures and civilizations have been lacking, until now. Ran II is just awesome.

Sadly, although my computer system can display some of what you've done, there are big pieces of the add-on that my system cannot handle. This is a continuing mystery to me. I have a good system. It is:

HP P4 - 1.6 GHz CPU
512 MB DRAM
Nividia GeForce 4 TI 4200 AGP video card with 128 MB video RAM and latest drivers (6177)
120 GB Hard Drive
Win XP

My system handles the newest and most detailed video games, from Halo to Medal of Honor to Doom 3. My frame rates playing those games, which include very detailed sets and high-end graphics far more elaborate than the RAN setup, are up to 40 fps. Yet, when I try to view some of the places in the Celestia RAN add-on, such as the Needle area, my computer just about locks up. My frame rates drop to 1 or 2 fps and parts of the Needle appear and disappear as I move closer or farther away. It is MOST frustrating. The frame rates are low even if I make sure there are no other add-ons up in the sky. In fact, if I also load the Trifid Nebula, as well as RAN, frame rates drop to zero.

Obviously, you do not have a problem viewing the Needle on your system, otherwise you would not have drawn it so detailed. What system do you have? You clearly know a great deal about computer graphics. Is there anything I can do to see the RAN add-on better, short of buying a newer video card? My TI 4200 is only 1 year old. Somehow, I am not convinced that buying a new card is going to solve the problem. After all, the 4200 handles computer games just fine ... even the new ones.

I tried running RAN II on one of my school computers. They are also Pentium IV's, with FX 5200 cards. On that system, the RAN needle area also locked up the computer. It just sat there, with a frame rate moving at under 1 fps.

I wish I was a programmer so I could understand the difference between game software that seems to handle extensive graphics and high speed movement through very detailed worlds with ease, and Celestia software, that struggles to draw things like the Needle. I presume it has something to do with the way Celestia draws graphics. Is this something you could help me to understand, in a non-technical way? What can I do??

HELP!!!!

Frank

[selden]

Frank,

Unfortunately, I think the long pauses are caused by Celestia using synchronous I/O to read in and load all the large high-resolution surface texture images.

FWIW, you no longer have the most recent drivers. Nvidia officially released v66.93 two days ago, primarily adding 6600 support. They also upgrade OpenGL from v1.5.1 to v1.5.2, although I dunno what new OpenGL features that supports; probably mostly 6000 series functionality.

[rthorvald]

... parts of the Needle appear and disappear as I move closer or farther away

I have this problem with the OSX 1.3.2 version, but not with version 1.3.1. As i understand it, OSX 1.3.2 and the prereleases of Windows 1.4 have the same core. This problem has been discussed in general in the bugs forum, connected to discussions on the new CMOD format (it appears to affect 3ds, too).

... when I try to view some of the places in the Celestia RAN add-on, such as the Needle area, my computer just about locks up. My frame rates drop to 1 or 2 fps (...) The frame rates are low even if I make sure there are no other add-ons up in the sky

The frame rate on my system also slows down a bit when going close to some of the largest models, but they don?t inhibit movement as extremely as you seem to experience. But, some the models are big, and if you have several of them live at the same time, Celestia do slow down.

Obviously, you do not have a problem viewing the Needle on your system, otherwise you would not have drawn it so detailed. What system do you have?

I have a 667mhz G4 Powerbook with 768 MB Ram, with an ATI Radeon 7500 card with 32 MB Vram. Exept for the graphics card, these specs aren?t really compatible with a PC spesification, though; Intel and Motorola chips are rather different.

Is there anything I can do to see the RAN add-on better, short of buying a newer video card?

As for the Needle, it exists in the same time and space as the Hroenn Spaceport landscape, which is by far the largest model in Ran II (almost 15 MB). Try removing it from the Civilisation Models folder, and see if that helps - the filename is "th_hroenntower.3ds".

The only other possible trouble spot i can think of is the Wub on Hefring; here, you have two options:
A) remove the "th_wubs.3ds" model from the Solar System Models folder (it will leave you with just a single Wub)
b) comment out one of the two Wub groups from the Solar System SSC (will leave you with half of the wubs missing).

Another thing: to handle the hi-res textures easier, you can edit the ctx documents in the hi-res folder: most tilesizes are set to 256 - a larger number (512/1024, etc) will make Celestia run smoother, but you will lose detail - it will not load the higher texture levels - experiment with it.)

In general, don?t run other apps simultaneously with Celestia. Also, try loading the textures *before* the models (visit the place in an earlier age, before the models exist).

I wish I was a programmer so I could understand the difference between game software that seems to handle extensive graphics and high speed movement through very detailed worlds with ease, and Celestia software, that struggles to draw things like the Needle.

I am no programmer either, but... I understand it is a big difference in how a game handles models and how Celestia does; game software usually cheats in ways Celestia can?t.

For example, a game will have more than one model for each 3D object. So, if you are far away, or are moving very fast, it renders a lo-res lightweight version, but when you slow down, or go close, it switches to a hi-res, more detailed version. In many cases, it does not use 3D models at all, but just draws what you are looking at from a mathematical formula.

Also, a game can usually anticipate (to a degree) what you are about to do, and load what you need to see before you need it. That way, movement from one object to the next will be smoother because the next one is already in memory when you get there, so you won?t notice any loading time.

Hope this helps a little.

- rthorvald

[alphap1us]

Hi Frank and Runar,
One thing that might help squeeze the last littile drop of performance out, I learned from some other tips site. You can create a new user and give this user as few options and installed programs as possible, so you have the minimum number of processes running in the background and consuming resources. In OS X this is easy and safe to do, and it boosts performance considerably, but in Windows there might be problems with security as you would want to turn off all your zonealarm and anti-virus type programs from running in the background. YMMV

Cheers,
Joe

[selden]

The Billow Maidens simply needs lots of main memory.

I've been visiting various locations in the Ran system and have come to the conclusion that the primary cause of poor performance is a lack of main memory.

My home system has 256MB of physical memory and 1GB of disk space allocated for virtual memory on the system disk. Celestia and its Addons are on a separate "data" disk.

When I go from one interesting location to another one, the disk activity light on the system disk goes on solid and I can hear its disk actuators going berserk. In other words, my system is paging itself to death. It can't fit everything into main memory. Celestia often stops redrawing its window for many seconds. At the same time, I see very litle data disk activity. Reading in the models and surface textures takes very little time.

Once the elements of a scene are in memory, though, looking around usually is reasonable. 15 fps or more is common, despite my relatively slow graphics card. Of course, there are some pathological scenes which include enough details that even slight changes of viewpoint cause an incredible amount of paging again.

System:
256MB 500MHz P3; WinXP Pro, SP2
128MB 250MHz FX5700LE, ForceWare 66.93
Celestia v1.4.0pre6

[fsgregs]

Selden:

I have a 120 GB Hard Drive and 512 MB of RAM. I have enough memory to allocate any amount I wish. What is the procedure to optimize memory allocation in a WIN XP system to please the demands of Celestia? You mentioned how to do it once before somewhere, but if you could please re-explain, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks


Frank

[selden]

Selden:

I have a 120 GB Hard Drive and 512 MB of RAM.

512MB is not enough RAM if you want to tour much of The Billow Maidens without exiting from Celestia. :(

My system at work has 512MB and it choked.
1GB of RAM probably is more appropriate.

Also, after I viewed about a dozen locations, some objects that I was visiting for the first time weren't being drawn. I presume this means that more than 128MB of graphics memory is needed, too. :(

What is the procedure to optimize memory allocation in a WIN XP system to please the demands of Celestia? You mentioned how to do it once before somewhere, but if you could please re-explain, I'd appreciate it.

Please remember that a paging file can only make it possible to run large programs. It can't make them run well. For that you need more RAM. Optimizing the paging file is not going to increase Celestia's frame rate by very much.

Basically, the paging file needs to be contiguous.
A non-contiguous file has pieces scattered all over the disk. Moving the disk heads is slow, so you want to minimize the need to move them. A contiguous file has all of its blocks next to one another.

To minimize interference with other disk I/O, the paging file also should not be on a disk where you do a lot of other I/O. Paging takes priority over all other I/O requests.

Here is one method of optimizing a paging file, assuming you're currently letting Windows control it dynamically.

1. defragment the disk containing your paging file.
2. Reboot (so that the system is using a minimal paging file.)
3. Allocate a paging file with a large fixed size
(When Windows is allowed to control the size, it allocates new paging file chunks wherever it finds room on the disk.)
4. optional: defragment the paging file.
(When you allocate the file, it'll be in at least two pices, maybe more. At least one piece will be what Windows dynamically allocated, and one large piece that was added when you configured the fixed size. Unfortunately, Windows doesn't include software that can defragment a paging file. There are 3rd party programs that can.)
5. reboot

Step 3 is the important one, of course. Under XP you can create a fixed size paging file by following this procedure:

1. open the Start menu
2. open the Control Panel
3. open the System window
4. select the Advanced tab
5. select the Performance Settings button
+ the "Performance Options" window opens
6. select the Advanced tab
7. select the Virtual Memory Change button (near the bottom right of the window)
+ the "Virtual Memory" window opens
8. highlight the drive where you want the paging file to be -- normally C:
9. select "Custom Size"
10. Set "Initial Size" to a large value, maybe 4096
11. Set "Maximum Size" to exactly that same value
(You do not want Windows to even consider adding to it and thus causing it to fragment.)
12. Select the "Set" button

13. Click on all the OK buttons, closing all the windows.
14. Reboot so the new paging file is used.

15. verify that the new paging file actually is being used. (I've seen cases where sometimes it wasn't.)

15a. open the Windows Task Manager
15b. select the Performance tab
15c. observe the "Commit Charge (K) pane at the bottom left. The "Limit" value should be the sum of your systems RAM size and the size of the new paging file.

My system at work has 512MB of main memory and 2048MB of virtual memory, and its Limit value is 2588772

Whew!
I hope this helps.

[rthorvald]

My system at work has 512MB and it choked.
1GB of RAM probably is more appropriate. [...] Also, after I viewed about a dozen locations, some objects that I was visiting for the first time weren't being drawn

This brings new actuality to the question about a "light" version.
I?m afraid that, when i made this, i wasn?t too concerned about how it would behave on different computer systems... I just thought that if i could run it on my own, relatively modest system, it would be good enough.

The problem with a light version is that there isn?t really much one can remove without the scenario falling apart.

One thought is to make a "snapshot" of Ran at a particular time: removing all the time travel features, and just make a static add-on. That would do away with the terraforming, all the moving spacecraft, and the locations that only exist later than the particular date. Would probably save 50% or so, if i set it to 2600 (after the Space Elevator, but before the Aegir miners and Himinglaeva colonisation). This would leave us with a complete solar system and civilisation, but there wouldn?t be anything actually happening there...

Suggestions?

-rthorvald