I didn't see your edited post from earlier (where you added more pics after you edited) until now, but all those images, including the imgur shot... seem fine to me. I'm not sure if there is a problem or not, to be honest. Is it possible that your expectations are different than what the mod really does? Is there another picture somewhere else that somebody else has posted that has made you feel like you're not getting the higher definition that you should be? Check out these videos and watch them fullscreen in HD, and see if the stars look less fuzzy on my Stellar Sky, than yours. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuJ48ekMRvW_IfExw3wC5Ww
Well, when I first downloaded the mod in the 1.7.10 version it had "crisp" skies as in, the stars/galaxy isn't "fuzzy" and "blurry" after downloading the 1.9.4 version, the galaxy seem to be "blurry" which it hasn't before that's why I brought it up in the first place.
But I just tested it now, the 1.7 version seem to have the same problem, I'll test out different versions (of the mod) to see.I think computer had problems in the mod, in the version that has "crisp" skies, there were jagged lines at the horizon and now it seems to me everything is blurry.
Anyways, thanks for trying to help.
EDIT: Just found what version gave me the "crisp" skies, version 1.4.7, for the 1.7.10 version. Not sure if that helps in any way though.
Well, when I first downloaded the mod in the 1.7.10 version it had "crisp" skies as in, the stars/galaxy isn't "fuzzy" and "blurry" after downloading the 1.9.4 version, the galaxy seem to be "blurry" which it hasn't before that's why I brought it up in the first place.
But I just tested it now, the 1.7 version seem to have the same problem, I'll test out different versions (of the mod) to see.I think computer had problems in the mod, in the version that has "crisp" skies, there were jagged lines at the horizon and now it seems to me everything is blurry.
Anyways, thanks for trying to help.
EDIT: Just found what version gave me the "crisp" skies, version 1.4.7, for the 1.7.10 version. Not sure if that helps in any way though.
No problem! Lemme know if what you see in my videos is better/worse than what you are currently experiencing.
Here's the screenshot for the "crisper" skies--version 0.1.4.7 (of Stellar Sky and latest Stellar API version).
I could notice slight differences when comparing both images I uploaded to imgur.
EDIT: v0.1.4.7 of Stellar Sky (for Minecraft 1.7.10) gave me clear and sharp skies while v0.4.5.2.3 (for Mineecraft 1.9.4) and v0.1.5.7 (for Minecraft 1.7.10) gave me blurry skies.
Alright, I'm still on version v.0.1.22 from before that, so that's probably why I haven't encountered what you're experiencing. I'm not sure I would be much help at this stage. What I recommend you do though (and would be awesome of you, if you did), is try each version going forward, until you find the version where the problem appears, and then file an issue on Abastro's github showing the problem, and version number where the problem is introduced. That will help him figure out exactly what happened, and he should be able to fix it quickly. I'm surprised nobody else has complained about it, to be honest. Good on you for spotting the difference!
I pin-pointed which version caused the problem, it was v0.1.5.0 -- It's pretty easy to switch version of mods using the Curse Client.
Some questions posted for you on Github... not sure if you're getting notifications there or not. Just checkin', because you've been replying pretty quickly here. Abastro and I are talking about what you are experiencing, and need ya to look at a few things.
Anyways, I guess the thing I thought was an issue, was intended
So this sky was intended but not this one, could you guys somehow implement the "sharper" one officially xD-- since that sharp one looks so realistic, almost like that picture was done in real life
Anyways, I guess the thing I thought was an issue, was intended
So this sky was intended but not this one, could you guys somehow implement the "sharper" one officially xD-- since that sharp one looks so realistic, almost like that picture was done in real life
Abastro was just telling me he might add in a config option so users can adjust the 'sharpness' of stars.
That said, it's hard for me to say for certain without looking at the night sky in real life on a clear night, as I'm writing this... but it seems to me that the blurry version is actually more realistic, due to the way light diffracts through the earth's atmosphere. That diffraction is also part of the same reason why stars "twinkle". In reality, stars don't actually twinkle like that, we only see them that way because the way the light scatters (gets brighter and dimmer, and also gets "blurrier") when it hits the earth's atmosphere. Check it out and see what I mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_seeing
Well, I have never seen a night sky without light pollution as well so I wouldn't really know what it's like but I do think it's somewhat realistic especially in areas that are up in the mountains or deserts where there isn't much "disturbances" causing the light to defract or "blurrify". I guess that is the case? I might be wrong though. This is more like an Astronomy fan page than a mod post. xD
EDIT: Would Stellarium be compatible with Advanced Rocketry? (It's another Space Exploration Mod, I highly doubt it would be compatible but what's the harm in asking?)
I don't know about how the height of the sun would be implemented, but I can say that latitude in TFC is based solely off the Z-coordinate, so you wouldn't need to hook into their API, just check whether or not TFC is installed. Combine that with time of year and you have a formula...
Also, great job on these mods! Very cool! Can I ask what the current status of Stellarium is?
Thanks for your interest!
About TFC, yes I can do that, but I just don't like doing those 'hacks'. Also I don't know how to handle the cases when Z coord is too big/small. I wonder how TFC deal with it.
On Stellarium.., there does have been some progress, in Stellar API.
I'm certain that Stellarium will definitely be available in a month when Stellar API has gone through rewrite successfully.
ETA? I think the rewrite will take a month and half.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
Thanks for your interest!
About TFC, yes I can do that, but I just don't like doing those 'hacks'. Also I don't know how to handle the cases when Z coord is too big/small. I wonder how TFC deal with it.
On Stellarium.., there does have been some progress, in Stellar API.
I'm certain that Stellarium will definitely be available in a month when Stellar API has gone through rewrite successfully.
ETA? I think the rewrite will take a month and half.
In issue #16 it details the way TFC calculates latitude from the z coord. Since TFC is only trying to simulate temperature variation from equator to pole, it does not overly care about having a small number. My guess for handling small/large numbers is to compress them to a near value. For instance, at 1 z the degree north would be 0.0022495501. At that point, I don't imagine the visible difference to be to great from 0 degrees. As for large numbers, in my experience, TFC tends to crash after going beyond +/- 45000, and even that is only 100 degrees north, so the numbers do not go into the realm of impossibility. Also, travel in TFC is not exactly easy, so to get there would take a lot of time. Players also have very little reason to do so, since at around 35000z the temperature bottoms out, not getting any colder, so the want to make a freezer, there is no point to go that much further in. Also, if I remember correctly, latitude only goes to 180 degrees, which with the calculation TFC uses is around 80015.9996437 on the z axis, a value very few [read: none] will go to.
In issue #16 it details the way TFC calculates latitude from the z coord. Since TFC is only trying to simulate temperature variation from equator to pole, it does not overly care about having a small number. My guess for handling small/large numbers is to compress them to a near value. For instance, at 1 z the degree north would be 0.0022495501. At that point, I don't imagine the visible difference to be to great from 0 degrees. As for large numbers, in my experience, TFC tends to crash after going beyond +/- 45000, and even that is only 100 degrees north, so the numbers do not go into the realm of impossibility. Also, travel in TFC is not exactly easy, so to get there would take a lot of time. Players also have very little reason to do so, since at around 35000z the temperature bottoms out, not getting any colder, so the want to make a freezer, there is no point to go that much further in. Also, if I remember correctly, latitude only goes to 180 degrees, which with the calculation TFC uses is around 80015.9996437 on the z axis, a value very few [read: none] will go to.
Oh, I didn't remember that. Also, does TFC crash on too big z value? That's interesting.
So would it be okay to do whatever when lattitude is over 90 degrees / under -90 degrees?
Then I'll consider to implement TFC-specific compatibility.
+ Longitude support is impossible, sadly, because minecraft has universal day on a world.;
Oh, I didn't remember that. Also, does TFC crash on too big z value? That's interesting.
So would it be okay to do whatever when lattitude is over 90 degrees / under -90 degrees?
Then I'll consider to implement TFC-specific compatibility.
+ Longitude support is impossible, sadly, because minecraft has universal day on a world.;
Yeah, you should be pretty safe to do whatever after that point. Very few people go that far, and in my experience TFC crashes in that area as well.
I really want to ask, that does Stellar Sky still impact on performance? Since I only experienced up to 60FPS->40FPS decrease on the recent versions.
(Note: by recent version I mean, the ones for 1.9.4~1.10.2)
Stellar Sky gives a rather large performance hit, yes. Personally, I haven't experienced a huge hit from performance, but all those I know who use it from 1.7.10 to 1.9.4 have gotten fairly large hits. People tend to remove it from Technofirma due to lag, but that is in 1.7.
Yeah, you should be pretty safe to do whatever after that point. Very few people go that far, and in my experience TFC crashes in that area as well.
Stellar Sky gives a rather large performance hit, yes. Personally, I haven't experienced a huge hit from performance, but all those I know who use it from 1.7.10 to 1.9.4 have gotten fairly large hits. People tend to remove it from Technofirma due to lag, but that is in 1.7.
The version in the modpack was fairly old, and recent versions(I remember v0.*.3.*+) got several performance improvements.
But.. was there still FPS impact on 1.9.4?
Then it would be another problem. Could I know how much degree the hits are on?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
The version in the modpack was fairly old, and recent versions(I remember v0.*.3.*+) got several performance improvements.
But.. was there still FPS impact on 1.9.4?
Then it would be another problem. Could I know how much degree the hits are on?
Yeah, performance hit was present in 1.9.4. I do not have the data from that version, but for MC 1.10, the FPS hit I have (since I haven't had anyone else try yet) is from ~330 down to ~60. I imagine this number to be the size that it is because I have boosted the moon and milky way fractals to 32 and moon size to 2.5, other than that, I haven't messed with the config to much (that I can remember). BTW, what does landscape fragments do in the config?
Well, when I first downloaded the mod in the 1.7.10 version it had "crisp" skies as in, the stars/galaxy isn't "fuzzy" and "blurry" after downloading the 1.9.4 version, the galaxy seem to be "blurry" which it hasn't before that's why I brought it up in the first place.
But I just tested it now, the 1.7 version seem to have the same problem, I'll test out different versions (of the mod) to see.I think computer had problems in the mod, in the version that has "crisp" skies, there were jagged lines at the horizon and now it seems to me everything is blurry.
Anyways, thanks for trying to help.
EDIT: Just found what version gave me the "crisp" skies, version 1.4.7, for the 1.7.10 version. Not sure if that helps in any way though.
This thread, read it first before arguing about 1.9+ combat mechanics.
If Microsoft add any in-game purchases in Minecraft Java -- the game is doomed.
Computer: Getting soon....
Laptop: Lenovo G50 2015 - i5 5200U, r5 M230 OC, 500GB HDD @ 5400RPM and a terrible 768p Screen.
No problem! Lemme know if what you see in my videos is better/worse than what you are currently experiencing.
Here's the screenshot for the "crisper" skies--version 0.1.4.7 (of Stellar Sky and latest Stellar API version).
I could notice slight differences when comparing both images I uploaded to imgur.
EDIT: v0.1.4.7 of Stellar Sky (for Minecraft 1.7.10) gave me clear and sharp skies while v0.4.5.2.3 (for Mineecraft 1.9.4) and v0.1.5.7 (for Minecraft 1.7.10) gave me blurry skies.
This thread, read it first before arguing about 1.9+ combat mechanics.
If Microsoft add any in-game purchases in Minecraft Java -- the game is doomed.
Computer: Getting soon....
Laptop: Lenovo G50 2015 - i5 5200U, r5 M230 OC, 500GB HDD @ 5400RPM and a terrible 768p Screen.
Okay... I can see what you're saying now, when comparing those two imgur pics. There does seem to be a difference, for sure.
When you say version 1.4.7... do you mean v0.1.4.7?
Yeah, I didn't know how I missed the "0".
This thread, read it first before arguing about 1.9+ combat mechanics.
If Microsoft add any in-game purchases in Minecraft Java -- the game is doomed.
Computer: Getting soon....
Laptop: Lenovo G50 2015 - i5 5200U, r5 M230 OC, 500GB HDD @ 5400RPM and a terrible 768p Screen.
Alright, I'm still on version v.0.1.22 from before that, so that's probably why I haven't encountered what you're experiencing. I'm not sure I would be much help at this stage. What I recommend you do though (and would be awesome of you, if you did), is try each version going forward, until you find the version where the problem appears, and then file an issue on Abastro's github showing the problem, and version number where the problem is introduced. That will help him figure out exactly what happened, and he should be able to fix it quickly. I'm surprised nobody else has complained about it, to be honest. Good on you for spotting the difference!
Here's the link to the issue tracker: https://github.com/Abastro/StellarSky/issues
I pin-pointed which version caused the problem, it was v0.1.5.0 -- It's pretty easy to switch version of mods using the Curse Client.
This thread, read it first before arguing about 1.9+ combat mechanics.
If Microsoft add any in-game purchases in Minecraft Java -- the game is doomed.
Computer: Getting soon....
Laptop: Lenovo G50 2015 - i5 5200U, r5 M230 OC, 500GB HDD @ 5400RPM and a terrible 768p Screen.
Good stuff! Fire up an issue on the issue tracker and he's all set
Some questions posted for you on Github... not sure if you're getting notifications there or not. Just checkin', because you've been replying pretty quickly here. Abastro and I are talking about what you are experiencing, and need ya to look at a few things.
Anyways, I guess the thing I thought was an issue, was intended
So this sky was intended but not this one, could you guys somehow implement the "sharper" one officially xD-- since that sharp one looks so realistic, almost like that picture was done in real life
This thread, read it first before arguing about 1.9+ combat mechanics.
If Microsoft add any in-game purchases in Minecraft Java -- the game is doomed.
Computer: Getting soon....
Laptop: Lenovo G50 2015 - i5 5200U, r5 M230 OC, 500GB HDD @ 5400RPM and a terrible 768p Screen.
Abastro was just telling me he might add in a config option so users can adjust the 'sharpness' of stars.
That said, it's hard for me to say for certain without looking at the night sky in real life on a clear night, as I'm writing this... but it seems to me that the blurry version is actually more realistic, due to the way light diffracts through the earth's atmosphere. That diffraction is also part of the same reason why stars "twinkle". In reality, stars don't actually twinkle like that, we only see them that way because the way the light scatters (gets brighter and dimmer, and also gets "blurrier") when it hits the earth's atmosphere. Check it out and see what I mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_seeing
Well, I have never seen a night sky without light pollution as well so I wouldn't really know what it's like but I do think it's somewhat realistic especially in areas that are up in the mountains or deserts where there isn't much "disturbances" causing the light to defract or "blurrify". I guess that is the case? I might be wrong though. This is more like an Astronomy fan page than a mod post. xD
EDIT: Would Stellarium be compatible with Advanced Rocketry? (It's another Space Exploration Mod, I highly doubt it would be compatible but what's the harm in asking?)
This thread, read it first before arguing about 1.9+ combat mechanics.
If Microsoft add any in-game purchases in Minecraft Java -- the game is doomed.
Computer: Getting soon....
Laptop: Lenovo G50 2015 - i5 5200U, r5 M230 OC, 500GB HDD @ 5400RPM and a terrible 768p Screen.
Thanks for your interest!
About TFC, yes I can do that, but I just don't like doing those 'hacks'. Also I don't know how to handle the cases when Z coord is too big/small. I wonder how TFC deal with it.
On Stellarium.., there does have been some progress, in Stellar API.
I'm certain that Stellarium will definitely be available in a month when Stellar API has gone through rewrite successfully.
ETA? I think the rewrite will take a month and half.
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
+ InvWorks
In issue #16 it details the way TFC calculates latitude from the z coord. Since TFC is only trying to simulate temperature variation from equator to pole, it does not overly care about having a small number. My guess for handling small/large numbers is to compress them to a near value. For instance, at 1 z the degree north would be 0.0022495501. At that point, I don't imagine the visible difference to be to great from 0 degrees. As for large numbers, in my experience, TFC tends to crash after going beyond +/- 45000, and even that is only 100 degrees north, so the numbers do not go into the realm of impossibility. Also, travel in TFC is not exactly easy, so to get there would take a lot of time. Players also have very little reason to do so, since at around 35000z the temperature bottoms out, not getting any colder, so the want to make a freezer, there is no point to go that much further in. Also, if I remember correctly, latitude only goes to 180 degrees, which with the calculation TFC uses is around 80015.9996437 on the z axis, a value very few [read: none] will go to.
Oh, I didn't remember that. Also, does TFC crash on too big z value? That's interesting.
So would it be okay to do whatever when lattitude is over 90 degrees / under -90 degrees?
Then I'll consider to implement TFC-specific compatibility.
+ Longitude support is impossible, sadly, because minecraft has universal day on a world.;
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
+ InvWorks
I really want to ask, that does Stellar Sky still impact on performance? Since I only experienced up to 60FPS->40FPS decrease on the recent versions.
(Note: by recent version I mean, the ones for 1.9.4~1.10.2)
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
+ InvWorks
Yeah, you should be pretty safe to do whatever after that point. Very few people go that far, and in my experience TFC crashes in that area as well.
Stellar Sky gives a rather large performance hit, yes. Personally, I haven't experienced a huge hit from performance, but all those I know who use it from 1.7.10 to 1.9.4 have gotten fairly large hits. People tend to remove it from Technofirma due to lag, but that is in 1.7.
The version in the modpack was fairly old, and recent versions(I remember v0.*.3.*+) got several performance improvements.
But.. was there still FPS impact on 1.9.4?
Then it would be another problem. Could I know how much degree the hits are on?
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
+ InvWorks
Yeah, performance hit was present in 1.9.4. I do not have the data from that version, but for MC 1.10, the FPS hit I have (since I haven't had anyone else try yet) is from ~330 down to ~60. I imagine this number to be the size that it is because I have boosted the moon and milky way fractals to 32 and moon size to 2.5, other than that, I haven't messed with the config to much (that I can remember). BTW, what does landscape fragments do in the config?
It does nothing if landscpe is disabled. Its per-provider config in server config.
And.. wow. I didnt know the impact was that much.
EDIT: If I ever could investigate performance on the device...
Photoptics introduces optical instruments in minecraft such as binoculars and telescopes.
+ InvWorks