August 30, 2011 at 1:06 pm #81811tomm wrote:so I am assuming the glossy look is just due to the terrain being kindof high contrast colors
Precisely.Quote:– still too perlin noise-y.
I’m curious what you mean by that?August 30, 2011 at 2:08 pm #81812CoolhandParticipant
if its a contrast / colour thing, that difference should really be reduced, so its like nearly the same… light falling on the surfaces will separate the top and the sides due to shading. Infact there’s often too much contrast between patterns which emphasises the cg look of it.August 30, 2011 at 2:53 pm #81813Quote:if its a contrast / colour thing, that difference should really be reduced, so its like nearly the same…
Thats not such a good idea as in this case its the difference between grass and rock, as as you know they are not the same colour. The game is asigning one colour to the flat areas and another to the rough areas most of the time it works, however sometimes like in the case of the mountinas on mars, it assigns colours that look shiny in conjuntion with one another.
Its not something to worry about as the textures remove this effect. It was only ever an optical illusion and the textures break that illusion.
I was just curious about the phrase : ‘too perliny’ , as it is perlin noise 😉
Screenshots for Rob:
Sand dunes on mars.
[attachment=886:pioneer-msvc-9 2011-08-30 20-12-47-26.jpg]
And here is a perfect example of a place where the game has picked a light colour for the cliff and a dark for the flats, then in the section next to it has chosen the opposite, dark colour for cliffs and light for flats as you can see it looks a little odd 🙂 :
[attachment=885:pioneer-msvc-9 2011-08-30 20-02-35-33.jpg]August 30, 2011 at 4:32 pm #81814CoolhandParticipant
Well, anyway whatever you decide you should really fix those hills so they don’t look shiny.s2odan wrote:Thats not such a good idea as in this case its the difference between grass and rock, as as you know they are not the same colour.
I’m not talking about where you’re trying to illustrate the difference between vegetation and rock, I understand that a world is defined by contrasts…. But if you’re talking about something i saw on my last flight i’m not sure that all those small equally sized bits of moss fairly uniformally distributed over a desert look all that natural (to be fair i couldn’t really decide what either surfaces were meant to be) but honestly i’m going to assume that you knew that and i’m honestly not that patronising. It really has improved a great deal.s2odan wrote:It is perlin noise 😉
I know, and I’m sorry to say its still fairly obvious, particularly at low level where you’re looking at the last layer of noise which is where the excessive contrast between the colours is evident. infact looking at one planet i wasn’t sure if you were using a texture but that the bitmap was also of noise rather than depicting some real data, and very stretched – i had the impression of flying over chunky blue and black texels… But i guess that could also be a really simplified version of perlin?
Essentially like i’ve said many times it could be improved a lot with microtextures to take that edge computer generated edge off it, If you’re doing that already i’m not seeing a lot of evidence of it, but perhaps you’re talking of a future release?August 30, 2011 at 5:19 pm #81815Quote:I’m not talking about where you’re trying to illustrate the difference between vegetation and rock,
But that is essentially what causes the ‘gloss’. Colour scales by contours/roughness, certain colours look shiny when combined and the fact that the terrain is rather smooth, there are also no textures to hide the fact. Earth suffers from it much less due to the textures. Any planet textures we use are all generated on the fly in a similar fashion to the terrain, there was talk of moving the generation over the the graphics card which would be the ideal solution IMO.Coolhand wrote:but perhaps you’re talking of a future release?
No its been there for over a month now, they are only active on a handful of worlds though.Quote:infact looking at one planet i wasn’t sure if you were using a texture but that the bitmap was also of noise rather than depicting some real data,
That would be more help if you could give some specific data. Ideally you could read the stdout.txt and make a note of the details listed under the planets name. We have an issues tracker and issues specifically for this sort of thing. : https://github.com/pioneerspacesim/pioneer/issues/416
Pioneer is open source, if you come up with an idea or workable solution that might work then it can always be implimented. But you know, everyone has their own goals, for example at the moment my priority has been trying to optimise the terrain and just increase speed where possible.August 31, 2011 at 7:33 am #81816
just one question @ s2odan:
what exactly did you change on the terrain generation code when you made this video on youtube? Is it just more detail? i have the feeling that the colors look much more realistic and that the terrain is less scattered than in the recent version of pioneer. i am just saying, because this is EXACTLY how i would imagine a terraformed mars… please understand me, i am just a little bit disappointed that it looks so different now..
Do you think it is possible to make it look like this again?
Actually i don’t care so much about the details, what i think is that colors are actually the most important thing when it comes down to make things look credible. You did a wonderful job on mars in this video.August 31, 2011 at 11:23 am #81817
Ok the differences between that video and the current pioneer master are:
1. It was using a new terrain which is actually in the master now, just not active for Mars yet. (It will be, especially as that terrain is a fair bit faster than the very complicated mars one we currently have 😉 )
2. It had a new updated colour for Desert worlds which I seem to have unfortunately lost by overwriting an old branch, however its pretty trivial to re-write it and re-implement it as much of the legwork has already been done. IE colours have already been seperated to their specific material types, like rock sand or grass, so its just a matter of enabling them for that colour scheme.
3. It does have more detail than current master, however Robn and I are currently working out some changes which allow further customisation of the terrain which would enable detail like this, and even higher, if enabled by the user in the options menu. It also allows the user to reduce detail for performance considerations.
4. It uses the procedural geometry shading/texture stuff to break up the solid colours, this gives the terrain the shrub-like pattern and some patterns on the mountain which arent particularly visiable due to low contrast. These textures are currently in master, however only enabled for a small sub-set of terrrains.
5. It used Fluffy Freak’s threading code to make use of more than 2 cores, this is what causes the lags in the video, as Fraps is fighting with Pioneer for that 4th core 🙂
With any luck 1-4 aren’t far away, but 5 is some ways off from being implemented.Quote:because this is EXACTLY how i would imagine a terraformed mars… please understand me, i am just a little bit disappointed that it looks so different now..
Well because of your feedback I will activate this terrain for mars. As I was kind of sitting on the fence, as on one hand that terrain does look more authentic and run a bit faster, but on the other its far less detailed and has a lot less variation between continents, when I say its less detailed, I mean the way the fractals interact with each other.. Theres a lot less going on from that perspective.August 31, 2011 at 1:01 pm #81818
Thanks s2odan for the detailed answer!s2odan wrote:As I was kind of sitting on the fence, as on one hand that terrain does look more authentic and run a bit faster, but on the other its far less detailed and has a lot less variation between continents, when I say its less detailed, I mean the way the fractals interact with each other.. Theres a lot less going on from that perspective.
I think sometimes less detail actually can produce a more harmonic result. then it is not so… let me put it this way, wild. 😉
I addition to that it think i like this shrub-like pattern. When i understand it correctly, it means it reduces the contrast at “color-borders”, right?August 31, 2011 at 2:42 pm #81819
What it does is give a pattern or texture to a particular colour, which can help reduce contrast between borders, but mainly would help distinguish between actual rock or dirt and help break up the solid colours which make up the terrain. I’ll just post some examples and you can see for yourself 🙂
@ Coolhand, does your discerning eye agree that this helps alleviate the problem? 🙂August 31, 2011 at 2:48 pm #81820
I would go for it. Looks much better 🙂September 1, 2011 at 12:13 am #81821MarcelParticipant
A thought on that shiny Mars thing. I haven’t had the privilege of actually being able to see a planet from orbit, but it seems reasonable to assume that some terrains and lighting conditions would cause reflections into your eyes. In effect, some parts of a planet would probably appear shiny.September 1, 2011 at 3:39 am #81822BrianettaParticipantMarcel wrote:In effect, some parts of a planet would probably appear shiny.
The sea certainly does. NASA have video.September 1, 2011 at 10:43 am #81823
Very true Marcel, @ Brian not only the sea but also flat areas of land such as rock or desert, in certain lighting and atmospheric conditions they can appear to reflect light although the angle which you view them at has some bearing on that too.September 1, 2011 at 1:52 pm #81824
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bY-wjeQKjoU&hd=1[/youtube]September 1, 2011 at 8:35 pm #81825BrianettaParticipant
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.