Question: Celestia to the max

Mad_Griffith · Post #1by **Mad_Griffith** » 29.12.2005, 00:43

Hi,

I think that everyone here would be happy to know from experienced users (to whom I unfortunately do not belong) which add-ons can be considered:

b) of the highest quality available

c) of the highest realism proposable

Thank you very much!

BlindedByTheLight · Post #2by **BlindedByTheLight** » 29.12.2005, 01:09

What happened to A?

Actually, along the lines of the last post... it is a shame that no one really uses the ranking/feedback system at Motherlode... any ideas on how to encourage it? It would be useful for a lot of users...

Mad_Griffith · Post #3by **Mad_Griffith** » 29.12.2005, 01:15

sorry, I forgot to correct the letters since there was another point I deleted.

A way to encourage it? I find it quite difficult, normally this is a thing that comes spontaneously. The most experienced users, who follow the developing the community other than the program itself, should vote, imho.

BlindedByTheLight · Post #4by **BlindedByTheLight** » 29.12.2005, 02:22

Mad_Griffith wrote:A way to encourage it? I find it quite difficult, normally this is a thing that comes spontaneously.

Well, that's exactly my point. Such a thing often comes spontaneously... and the fact that it is NOT coming spontaneously probably means the feedback system needs work. Either in visibility, ease-of-use or the way it interfaces with users.

Perhaps it is two decades as a Mac user but I'm a big believer if the system is failing (and the feedback system is), there's something wrong with the system.

One suggestion... perhaps double-clickable links in the download folder (that say CLICK ME TO GIVE FEEDBACK) so a user can easily be directed to the feedback page? Stuff like that...

Post #5by **t00fri** » 29.12.2005, 10:55

As I wrote several times, I dislike feedback systems entertained by non-experts.

I know this habit has become very popular recently (across the internet), and kind of fits to the lifestyle of many.

I don't want feedback about books at Amazon, possibly by someone who has perhaps just managed to read his first book ;-)

. I don't want an exciting report about a network router, for example, by someone who has no idea about the meaning of the technical data and gives ***** because he managed quickly to configure that router. And so on...

There are quite a few things about Celestia add-ons that might be unsatisfactory. Only very few can be spotted and /located/ by non-experts.

a) Graphics: many things can go wrong there:
--------------
--like /noisy/ or /non-smooth/ normal maps generated by people from 8bit rather than 16bit elevation graymaps. Rescaling at the wrong moment during the sequence of usual working steps...Many add-on creators might not even know the secrets of 16bit graphics manipulations...

--chosing an inapropriate compression format for normal maps. Working with /lossy/ texture formats ...

-- Bad clouds and other issues about transparency, since the "creator" has never heard much about handing alpha channels.

-- inability to use procedural image manipulations for large textures, like recoloration of certain (selected) parts of the textures etc. Procedural layer manipulations...

-- lots of "hidden" imperfections in 3D modelling...

I can assure people that most of these "sins" cannot be spotted easily by users without image manipulation background.

b) Scientific correctness: lots of things can go wrong there... ;-)

---------------------

Obviously people without solid knowledge in physics, astrophysics, cosmology can hardly give competent feedback here.

Many people get their "knowledge" about science nowadays from ~obscure WEBsites or TV shows that mainly want to maximize the number of people watching...These media are OFTEN excellent platforms for spreading nonsense!

c) Technical imperfection and inability to produce /cross-platform/ add-ons
---------------------------

In particular, many add-on creators do not care to invest the considerable effort of upgrading their original add-ons to the evolving standards of the main Celestia engine.

In summary: such a feedback system may work for people who themselves have little specific knowledge...They simply don't realize what they just downloaded ;-)

But Mad_Griffith has specifically asked for a selection of really TOP add-ons.

++++++++++++++
Here is my advice: you can't effectively shorten the procedure too much if you have high standards. Get to know the experts in this Forum (which takes a while) and then you trust their know-how and chose add-ons essentially from them!
++++++++++++++

Bye Fridger

Mad_Griffith · Post #6by **Mad_Griffith** » 29.12.2005, 11:24

Thank you t00fri, I'll do it. And thank you for the whole explanation.

BlindedByTheLight · Post #7by **BlindedByTheLight** » 29.12.2005, 22:36

t00fri wrote:As I wrote several times, I dislike feedback systems entertained by non-experts.

Well, I agree with you that feedback from non-experts can be a slippery slope. Kinda like an unscientific poll. The results are not necessarily accurate. However, they ARE useful in the sense of getting a "feel" or for "putting your ear to the group" so to speak of the general impression in the active community. And, combined with comments, even an non-pro reader can very easily get a sense of the competence of the poster... and judge the ranking and merits of the add-on accordingly. No doubt, like other ranking systems, completely screwy comments will be balanced by experts weighing in, also.

So we would end up with a mixture of random rankings from non-pro's combined with corrections/rankings from the pro's. Surely that will result in something better than a newbie user PURELY randomly downloading an Earth texture add-on? Which is their only option now as they're getting their feet wet.

t00fri wrote:There are quite a few things about Celestia add-ons that might be unsatisfactory. Only very few can be spotted and /located/ by non-experts.

No argument there. But this is exactly my point. Not everyone has the ability (or bandwidth) to download every add-on and try it and compare to others. Even if they could they will still be relying on a non-expert's opinion of its worth... and what's worse, they will only be relying on ONE non-expert's opinion... namely their own. They will be, as you have said, incapable of judging on their own (other than their own aesthetic opinion) the worth of an add-on.

Sadly, I know the value of MY opinion... and it's bubkis (your English is fantastic... now let's try your Yiddish!). I wish I had a chance to read what YOU had to say about various add-ons... even just a line or two in a comment field. If I had to dig through other ka-ka, so be it.

t00fri wrote:I don't want feedback about books at Amazon, possibly by someone who has perhaps just managed to read his first book

I agree. Feedback about art is almost completely worthless as there is no "metric" of objective truth. Things based in fact, however, are a bit different. VersionTracker.com has a feedback system (yes, filled with lots of crap) but I have been amazed how accurately the "overall" impression one gets usually points the user to the best software.

What one ends up with is a "dialogue" between people about the merits of a piece of software. Yes, there is lots of B.S. thrown in but one can still be educated by (fairly easily) culling the "good" postings and seeing what the experts are saying. It is no different from any thread on this forum. There are experts talking Expert Talk and there Ka Ka People talking Ka Ka. I am just talking about specifically focusing that process down to the various add-ons.

t00fri wrote:Get to know the experts in this Forum (which takes a while) and then you trust their know-how and chose add-ons essentially from them!

Doesn't this only work if a great add-on maker has a presence in this forum? Do they all? That is not a rhetorical question.

But the real issue is not the merits of user-rankings and should we have one or not. Last time I checked, there IS a feedback system on the Motherlode. And it IS being used - with all the drawbacks you are writing about. It is just HARDLY being used, thereby potentially amplifying those drawbacks.

It would be great, not only from a Picking The Best Add-On (whatever that means) position, but also from an educational position to pull up an add-on and see snippets of comments from the Giants of The Board... talking about the pro's and con's. Not as a master lesson that is ten pages like (like Amazon comments)... just bits and pieces to start to give newbies (like me) a VOCABULARY on what to look for.

As you have said, a user who knows the experts on the board, will know which comments are the real McCoy and which are bogus.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to writing my editorial on The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe on barnesandnoble.com....

BlindedByTheLight · Post #8by **BlindedByTheLight** » 29.12.2005, 22:49

Just had a thought... perhaps there would be a way to implement a Creators on Creations thread (or groups of threads)... confined to postings by the "experts" (enforced by The Selden Hammer or just through a request in sticky on top).

My Guild does that with writers - they call it "Writers on Writers" (and no, it's not a Hollywood orgy). It's very informative to hear what the "experts" are saying on a particular script - especially when they disagree! (it is art after all).

That would solve all problems (except maybe some hurt feelings if people did not take the criticism constructively).

Paolo · Post #9by **Paolo** » 30.12.2005, 08:39

Hi

I've raised this point a couple of years ago when Motherlode was not available and we was dreaming of some sort of shared repository for the addons on the internet.

By now using Celestia with the minimal data, models, and texture contained in the standard package is a frustrating experience compared with the possible /Celestia to the max/. Specially for the large amount of people that at present time has a good or very good 3D harware.
So IMHO a list of the /Must-Have/ addons is absolutely essential in order to unleash and enjoy the true power of Celestia. If this list is created with some sort of feedback system by Motherlode users or is maintained directly by the developers crew is not important. I would prefer the second option that means that the add-ons in the list will be validated by true experts. For sure Selden, Chris and Fridger will already have their own list. If they will share and merge them we should have the /Celestia to the max/ that Mad_Griffith is looking for.

Kind regards

Post #10by **t00fri** » 30.12.2005, 11:51

Paolo wrote:
...validated by true experts. For sure Selden, Chris and Fridger will already have their own list. If they will share and merge them we should have the /Celestia to the max/ that Mad_Griffith is looking for.

Kind regards

Paulo,

please note that a) I use add-ons by others from the ML at best for testing compatibility with the current Celestia core code. Usually, I prefer to do my own if there is a need. b) My relations with the Motherlode have dropped to ZERO due to some incident a while ago.

With Runar and ElChristou we had thereafter started to contemplate a new site concept that would only host /excellent/ add-ons according to the high quality standards of the three of us. Moreover it was meant to be also considerably more general in scope than ML...

However, this project has not really left the ground yet, for various reasons. Clearly designing (and coding) a new site is a lot of work, and all three of us are very busy these days.... As concerns myself, it was mainly also the interference with my intensive coding activities around DSO's that received priority to keep Celestia development alive (FT1.x).

Bye Fridger

BlindedByTheLight · Post #11by **BlindedByTheLight** » 30.12.2005, 21:45

t00fri wrote:
Paolo wrote:
...validated by true experts. For sure Selden, Chris and Fridger will already have their own list. If they will share and merge them we should have the /Celestia to the max/ that Mad_Griffith is looking for.

Kind regards

Paulo,

please note that a) I use add-ons by others from the ML at best for testing compatibility with the current Celestia core code. Usually, I prefer to do my own if there is a need. b) My relations with the Motherlode have dropped to ZERO due to some incident a while ago.

Well, I agree with Paulo... a list validated by the experts would be just fine by me! But, yeah, Fridger... I remember your Point B.

As for the other site you are talking about... of course you are busy. So just add my voice to the choir of people who would LOVE to see such a site if time ever develops. And, whatever meager help I can offer, just let me know. I've worked with ElChristou in the background on a few things so perhaps, when the time comes, I can help out...

Take care and happy New Year!

Post #12by **t00fri** » 30.12.2005, 23:28

BlindedByTheLight wrote:...
As for the other site you are talking about... of course you are busy. So just add my voice to the choir of people who would LOVE to see such a site if time ever develops. And, whatever meager help I can offer, just let me know. I've worked with ElChristou in the background on a few things so perhaps, when the time comes, I can help out...

Take care and happy New Year!

Steven,

unfortunately I am currently out of "traffic" due to a nasty flu.
Thanks for offering help!

Cheers & an excellent New Year to you, too...

Fridger

BlindedByTheLight · Post #13by **BlindedByTheLight** » 31.12.2005, 00:09

t00fri wrote:Steven,

unfortunately I am currently out of "traffic" due to a nasty flu.
Thanks for offering help!

Cheers & an excellent New Year to you, too...

Fridger

Yikes! My heart goes out to you... last time I had the flu I was bed-ridden (well, floor ridden... I never made it back to the bed after the 2nd day) for 10 days and lost about 10 pounds. No small feat on my 140 pound frame...

But the fact that you are still able to type is a good sign. Be well and take care!