Re: Ideas for star fields?

[Jason S]

Joey, that map is amazing, almost like exploring space :]  (mapped on a sphere and looking around in the viewport.. ) I found that showing the selected env sphere's wireframe at low opacity helped to more easily see where the cam is pointing at on the map, acting like a grid. Nancy, Perhaps Joey would correct me?, but I would clone over the very big stars, I think those also are infinite points like the dimmer ones , but just very bright while just looking big from (clamped) long exposure. Wow Infinite points.. as you said were talking about things the size of suns lol.. the fact that things go just as far the other way around (like zooming in forever), can also be pretty baffling, how can infinity be contained in a spot? isn't that contradictory? :] On 06/26/14 14:07, Nancy Jacobs wrote: On Jun 26, 2014, at 9:58 AM, "Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]" <j.ponthi...@nasa.gov> wrote: If you are using the high res map, the jpeg file TychoSkymapII.t5_16384x08192.jpg will work just as well as the tiff without the file size overhead. Go to the image file’s ADJUST tab and set the Exposure to something like 2.0. You’ll be absolutely amazed at what is lurking in the lower range of the image. J   This should work equally as well whether you use the Environment shader that Matt suggested or a sphere object. If you are using a sphere object though you should set the material to a constant shader for best results. I find an exposure of about ~1 to ~1.5 lets these details show up without making the Milky Way  disc too obvious.   Thanks ill try this! I was using the gamma they suggest of 1.8, within SI. It seems to look fairly realistic, but without many stars showing. I didn't think of changing the exposure (except on the HDR version I made). You’ll also want to avoid looking at either of the poles. The projection they used does not appear to compensate real well with a typical spherical UV projection   I do need to look at the poles, I need a full 360 spatial view, unrestricted. I thought I would have to use Flexify on it, but so far it looks good, on the south pole, though I have to check it more...  From a personal perspective, to see the universe in this way and with this level of clarity is really amazing. Our sun is just one of those dots.   Yes, isn't it? And the vastness of space...so much space/time between all those stars as well. and we are circling only one of them on our tiny little earth... I find when you zoom into the image, more and more stars appear, and you can see the color shifts present. I would like to see more of them in the render however, so thank you for the exposure advice. Gamma adj in SI reduces the sense of depth too much, the whitish haze there doesn't read well. Nancy  -- Joey Ponthieux LaRC Information Technology Enhanced Services (LITES) Mymic Technical Services NASA Langley Research Center __________________________________________________ Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.   From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Nancy Jacobs Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:17 AM To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com Subject: Re: Ideas for star fields?   I'm rendering with Redshift. What I've been experimenting with is to take the star field map I'm using for the background, whether Hubble or now Joey Ponthieux's wonderful suggestion of the NASA star field image. It seems to wrap nicely to a sphere, not much shows up in the render, but it's a good base to work with.