Planets: How big is too big?

The atmosphere looks a little thin (or nonexistant), and the clouds need to be less evenly spread out across the entire globe; the weather shouldn't be the same everywhere. Other than that it looks good.

Will you be texturing the band? And making it, um, actually round?

I agree with Guy. The planet looks great but the band needs a little more work.

@guy, on Aug 27 2007, 03:39 AM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

Will you be texturing the band? And making it, um, actually round?

Yes, texturing the band is next on the list, I also had a dream that ya'll wouldn't let me go with the current clouds. (seriously)

I don't however see what isn't round. The earth is a sphere and the ring is a torus, rendered at a 1:1 ratio. Thus it should be round, no?

You must be refering to the low polygon count? Thats pretty easy to fix if thats what you mean. I'll post an updated version soon.

Yup, that's what I was referring to. Ha, I just noticed the name of the image

The Kane Band is now properly smooth, and has been textured. (I experimented with adding city lights, but by the time the image was reduced to sprite size they looked like a blur.)

The clouds are now real GOES weathersat data.

mostlyharmless3.jpg (92.88K)
Number of downloads: 24

I suppose the next and hopefully final step is to find a way to make the atmosphere visible without ruining any possibility of masking the thing properly...

As for the file name, I couldn't resist.

--BP

An atmospheric glow is now present, and the axis is now tilted.

mostlyharmless4.jpg (97.76K)
Number of downloads: 23

Two words - Awesomely sexy.

Thanks ergoeg5!

I'm taking suggestions for a name for the plug at this point.

Here's a shot of the Moonrise system to help people think:

moonrise.jpg (65.03K)
Number of downloads: 19

--BP

@blueplanet, on Aug 26 2007, 09:38 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

Good luck with your TC. Is there some place to read more about it?

--BP

@blueplanet, on Aug 27 2007, 05:14 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

I'm taking suggestions for a name for the plug at this point.

Here's a shot of the Moonrise system to help people think:

--BP

I have a post in developers corner. look up ~A P O P H I S~. also check out the members gallery for apophis. (top right corner )and a couple other things round & about the forum. I have no site (YET!)

for names, how 'bout "Planetary Redux?(2000!)

@blueplanet, on Aug 23 2007, 09:08 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

I recently started on a plug which replaces the planet graphics in the standard EV:N scenario.

My question for you all is how large do you think it is reasonable to have a planet be?

450x450 pixel planets with two sprites on-screen runs fine on my intel core duo, but would older machines have problems?

Can you forsee any other random problems with having very large planet sprites?

-- BP

**I did this years ago with EVO. Performance suffered somewhat, but the effect is cool, as long as you don't overuse it. Quite frankly, I always thought it was a cool surprise to come upon a gigantic planet out of nowhere, some of which filled up the entire screen.

_bomb

**

Indeed, its pretty cool to jump into Nesre Secondus and have your screen filled by a gas gaint.

Performance hasn't suffered yet on my machine, and I have some planets quite large indeed.

I only worry about people with G3s and older G4s being able to play my plug at a decent framerate.

Guess I'll find out come beta time, which should be fairly soon.

--BP

Get into making planets from scratch. Then start at a size like 1000x1000 pixels, that way you can downsize to whatever and play around.

@mwalk, on Aug 29 2007, 01:53 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

Get into making planets from scratch. Then start at a size like 1000x1000 pixels, that way you can downsize to whatever and play around.

Actually I started at 3000x3000 pixels...

Most planets are 450x450 in game. Moons are smaller, gas giants are larger.

Also, these are original planets, made from scratch (Photoshop w/Plugins and Cinema 4D) The only exceptions are the few that use NASA imagery as textures, which will be noted in the readme.

This post has been edited by BluePlanet : 29 August 2007 - 09:18 AM

Oh, anything above 1000x1000 will do. What type of plugins?

Doublepostblasphemy!

This post has been edited by mWalk : 29 August 2007 - 03:03 PM

@mwalk, on Aug 29 2007, 08:02 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

What type of plugins?

Lunarcell, a fractal-based planet creation tool. Published I believe by Flaming Pear.

Capable of amazing diversity for a slider-based interface. Less painful than rendering each and every one in a 3D app.

I reccomend it for anybody who wants to create planets for Nova or indeed any other purpose.

--BP

What does 'fractal-based' mean?

@cosmic_nusiance, on Aug 29 2007, 10:58 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

What does 'fractal-based' mean?

The basic gist of it is that is uses fractals to generate unique topography.

Its tricky to explain exactly what a fractal is, so here's Apple's dictonary's definiton of fractal:

"Noun, Mathematics
a curve or geometric figure, each part of which has the same statistical character as the whole. Fractals are useful in modeling structures (such as eroded coastlines or snowflakes) in which similar patterns recur at progressively smaller scales, and in describing partly random or chaotic phenomena such as crystal growth, fluid turbulence, and galaxy formation."

--BP

@blueplanet, on Aug 29 2007, 07:36 PM, said in Planets: How big is too big?:

The basic gist of it is that is uses fractals to generate unique topography.

Its tricky to explain exactly what a fractal is, so here's Apple's dictonary's definiton of fractal:

"Noun, Mathematics
a curve or geometric figure, each part of which has the same statistical character as the whole. Fractals are useful in modeling structures (such as eroded coastlines or snowflakes) in which similar patterns recur at progressively smaller scales, and in describing partly random or chaotic phenomena such as crystal growth, fluid turbulence, and galaxy formation."

--BP

Ah. I get it now. I think.