Planetside Software Forums

No matter, I'm an idiot.

Very generous. I've got this tucked away until I'm better versed in TG2.
Norm.

i am rendering something right now but i'll try !
this is a very different approach of the night sky... i didn't think about this way... good job.

Cool, thanks :).

No matter, I'm an idiot.

Some good thinking.  I can't wait to try this.

Thanks.

Wow bro ya I hear ya, and what a wonderful resource for peeps, that is why everyone here will add to that and why this was all created so rest assured most of us have goodies to share back, but your resources are wonderful, thanks.

  I remember a interview with Jo Walsh once and one of the questions the reporter asked was, did he get upset with people using his guitar licks and making songs from them.  His answer was Hell no, as I go and grab the licks back and make them my own again.  Meaning anything with most of us that gets used will be unique as artists are just kinda that way /winks... so you safe as all of us are with sharing.  Besides your right we can all learn faster if we all work together and share what we learn.

  Having said that I will post some Skies of mine here soon since I am going to do a bunch here for a project I have in mind and there will be lots of extras so to speak getting to that perfect Sky Box I have in mind. You one Top Elf my brother.

DT

Thank you; now I must find that model of a Coyote baying at the moon. I appreciate your generosity DandelO!

Awesome dandelo, much thanks!!

Um, is there any reason at all that when opening any of the two files it gives me a loooong list of errors (over 30)? Or why it doesn't be seem to be rendering correctly?

No matter, I'm an idiot.

Thank you ! It will be very usefull :)

I might use this as a space background for some of my scenes. I wouldn't use it as a night sky because then you need all those fancy surface shaders so it doesn't look like a "noob" render and it's easier to project a map onto a planet from space.

No matter, I'm an idiot.

Let me clarify: "...all those fancy surface shaders so it doesn't look like a 'noob' render"
I was referring to surface shaders on the ground. It is easier to project a map onto a planet from high above the surface. I usually use a second camera to do that. Then I render using the default camera. In my experience (somewhere around a week or two  :) ) scenes render far faster from space, and that's a real plus for me. Especially because I'm very impatient.

Quote from: TheBlackHole on October 04, 2009, 02:18:15 PM
I'm very impatient.

that doesn't fit with TG2

Roger that.

Quote from: Seth on October 05, 2009, 11:48:52 AM

Quote from: TheBlackHole on October 04, 2009, 02:18:15 PM
I'm very impatient.

that doesn't fit with TG2

Works a treat. And a free moon as well? Wow! I notice how the moons co-ordinates are correct too. :)
Is it really that big in the sky? It looks massive on my renders. (just to ask, not doubting you one second)
Also, how would I increase or decrease the amount of stars? Thanks again. Great job.

No matter, I'm an idiot.

You might want a radius of 1.73753e+006 for the moon. That's the real radius. As for distance, you'd want 37.8022e+006 or something. I might include this file in a default project like dandelO. Might also put some of the clouds from "Rocky Hills" in it.

I read somewhere, from Matt I think, that using real distances adds compute time and increases noise. I would use the planet coordinates that the program generates then adjust the size, height angle, and heading. Scale is often relative.

Quote from: njeneb on January 03, 2010, 02:52:16 PM
I read somewhere, from Matt I think, that using real distances adds compute time and increases noise. I would use the planet coordinates that the program generates then adjust the size, height angle, and heading. Scale is often relative.

I think you might be remembering something Oshyan wrote about an eclipse simulation. Oshyan wasn't exactly correct about the reasons for the noise, but it was to do with soft shadows in atmosphere spread over a very large area. Not a problem here.

If you're talking about accuracy problems that occur due to rounding of very large numbers, you only need to worry about that if you get close to the object, i.e. if both camera and object are far from the origin.

Thank you Matt! 8)

No matter, I'm an idiot.

Hi Martin,

Thanks for your great work! As I am a beginner in TG2, your library helps me a lot getting into the advanced stuff and to see how to use the loads of different shader types and functions effectively.

I have used the procedural night sky in the attached pic. It's the 1st notable one I have made with TG2. I know there are a lot of things to be improved on this image, especially the fog on the watersurface doesn't look very realistic.

Has anyone ideas how to cast a bit (more) of light on the altocumulus clouds? I'd like to have them 'glowing' seams where the moonlight shines through. I'm not so sure about the moonlight at all, I've placed an additional light source 'round' the moon, it's size is just a bit bigger, and strenghened the light (whatever this exactly means). But the pics main lighting effects are done using an increased environmental light. I see only little effect coming from the moonlight so far.

WBR
Günther

---

Put the sun behind the moon and uncheck "Cast Shadows" on the moon. You'll get bright lighting. Tone the light down to a dark gray, and voila, moonlight.

No matter, I'm an idiot.

Quote from: TheBlackHole on January 05, 2010, 03:59:02 PM
Put the sun behind the moon and uncheck "Cast Shadows" on the moon. You'll get bright lighting. Tone the light down to a dark gray, and voila, moonlight.

'Brilliant'! I've been looking for something like this ...thank you.