HereComesTheBoom

Berlin, does the line of code, "_DetailDist = 1E-07" refer to an offset?

Sounds good! Cant wait!

That's the exact same way Astronomer was able to create bioluminescent clouds on the dark side of Laythe. It never emitted light though, the cloud textures were just bluish on the night side. What would Rbray have to fix for you to be able to create a glow that would shine up as well as down for the volumetric auroras? You also said you'd post some videos of the testing of the volumetric auroras, how are those coming along?

I'll refer you to Berlin about the illumination comment, because he clearly said he was able to get illumination on low level flights and on the surface. To Berlin, my question still stands about how you were able to get the illumination.

Ah now I see, I don't have the programs to open the config files to see what they actually do. I assumed based on Rbray's video from his testing of cloud shadows that the shadows are projected from the cloud and color the ground a darker shade relative to the shape of the cloud itself. If that were true then the glow from the aurora's could have worked. Then again, Berlin has already said that he has the aurora's glowing from below, on the surface and during low level flights. If I may ask Berlin, how did you get the aurora's to glow?

So if you're not using clouds for the volumetrics, could you at least say that what you're using to create the volumetrics is the same way you would create volumetric clouds? If that is so, then couldn't you try and repurpose the shadow config that is given to all volumetric clouds for the light? EVE does have a specific cloud shadow config, you could try editing it to make the shadows not so defined in their shape relative to the cloud, but rather blur the line between the shadow, and the part of the ground without the shadow. Then, as I said earlier, just change the color of the cloud's shadow that is casted on the ground to the color of the aurora. I'm going to make the assumption based of your amazing skills working with these mods already that it shouldn't be that hard to create a line in the shadow config that you would repurpose telling the shadow, or at this point surface glow, to flip 180 degrees and point towards space for a glow on the top side of the aurora. All of this I'm explaining seems like it could work, but the first thing you'd have to do to make any of what I just explained work is to delete anything that relates the position of the glow/shadow to the position of the sun, like the cloud shadows are. See, I'm not trying to say that the clouds could emit light, I'm saying that you can try and repurpose what you already have there, in this case, the cloud shadows. Astronomer's Visual Pack Edge of Oblivion added a feature that made the clouds only on the dark side of Laythe bioluminescent. Maybe you could take a look at that and see if we can learn anything from it. It seems I'm a wishful thinker as well, but this honestly seems like it could work the way I explained it. I'm just trying to help.

That sounds amazing, and I know what you mean about believable textures, It took a long while for clouds in KSP to come along to what they are now. And yes that's what I mean about cloud shadows, how the clouds cast shadows on the ground in EVE is what I'm referring to. Maybe you could try and change the .txt file or whatever EVE uses that generates the cloud's shadows to instead make the shadows that you'd like the volumetric aurora textures to cast to be a lot more spread out and a brighter color, that way it looks like a bright glow rather than a shadow. Then, bare with me here cause it's about to get confusing... Maybe you could try and change the angle at which that glow you made for the aurora out of the cloud config is pointing to be 180 degrees in the opposite direction, straight up into space, if you will. Not sure if it will work, but if it does I'd have to assume when the glow you made out of the shadow config is pointing into space, a ship's surface will be considered the object to cast the glow on, if any of that makes any sense at all. I'm not aware of any other mod with cloud shadows, but I'll be sure to look around. If you'd like me to re-word what I've tried to explain, just let me know, otherwise I'll keep you posted on what I find. Good luck with the aurora glows you're working on!

Berlin, I had an intriguing idea pop into my head yesterday, have you ever thought of experimenting with Volumentric Auroras? Instead of the Aurora Borealis and Australis being a flat texture that looks pretty from above, you could instead try and use the same method in which you create volumetric clouds, just with aurora textures. This way the aurora's would be able to be flown through or at least have the look of it being possible. Maybe you'd even be able to allow the new volumetric auroras to emit light, similar to the way some ksp mods have clouds that emit shadows. Here's a real world example of what I am describing:

This looks a lot better, I'm impressed. I'm still yearning for something that comes close to Astronomer's Interstellar release. A mixture of the cloud layers from Interstellar, and the dark blue-ish green hue from SVE would be absolutely stunning My mind has a maximum comprehension limit, but I look forward to and hope you break it.

That picture was taken by someone that was using Astronomer's Visual Pack Interstellar. I found it and figured it would be useful for an example. I always LOVED Astronomer's packs, I usually took a little bit from each release and compiled them together for the best experience I could get out of it. Duna from the Oblivion release was always my favorite.

Wow, Jool looks absolutely stunning!!! Although, I did notice that the texture for Jool is what looks to be Jupiter. I love the dark, bluish green haze that this version of Jool has but I didn't want to look at Jool and be reminded of our own solar system, rather something extra-solar... Like this: Is there any way to change the texture but maintain the aesthetics of it on our own?

I'd agree that the most recent ones from Bethesda aren't up to par with others, though it's definitely a step up from their previous games. I'm a big fan of the fallout series, and graphics isn't what draws me to them. Fallout 3 continues to be one of my all-time favorite games due to its story line. So, judging from the artwork you've posted, do you think you'd ever get into making modded textures, or custom sun flares, etc. for the modding community?

Hey Proot, I just want to commend you on the amazing work you've done here for graphic junkies and casual KSP players alike. Keep up the good work! I have two questions though, keep in mind my pc is slow and about eight years old, so one of the questions I'm asking may be answered in the mod itself. Unfortunately, I can't answer it considering my rig's processing power. 1.) Do you think you'll ever try experimenting with volumetric auroras, instead of just a pretty, flat texture that spins around the poles, having the Aurora Borealis and Australis actually have a depth to them as they do here below? 2.) Do you recommend just plugging in the 1.1.3 version of Kopernicus into KSPRC or waiting until you update KSPRC itself. I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to modding so I don't know if there's a difference between the Kopernicus in the KSPRC .zip file and the main Kopernicus mod itself.

That's true, they do have a good reason to try and optimize, but the time they spend on adding in a few new stock parts isn't needed. They can leave modders like Bac9 and the NearFuture Devs to do that. If they really want to make the game better than it already is they need to work with clouds, atmospheric scattering, etc. I'm sure a team of professional game developers are able to create better graphical experiences than a community of modders, but that's just my humble opinion. Regardless, until they come out with some new graphical updates that rival what has already been accomplished in the modding community, I'll be using KSPRC.

I would bet on them not doing anything with graphics, just leaving it to the modding community. It seems every update they come out with for the game now-a-days is either to add a few new parts or optimize the game's performance.

Gotchya! TBH in the back of my head I was thinking the same thing but at the same time hoping that instinct was incorrect. I guess I'll just have to wait until I get a powerful enough rig to run KSPRC and some other stuff. Thanks for the reply!

So the trees in the photo of the B9 aircraft and the hyper realistic volumetric clouds, you created the tree models yourself (On some editing software) and I'm assuming used another program to procedurally place them throughout the landscape? And to the clouds, could you explain how in the world you got clouds like those? I have to assume you created everything and injected it all into the game yourself. I'm getting a pretty high powered rig soon, so I'd just like to know how to create a KSP that looks as good as your pictures do.

Hey Proot! Looks great so far! I have two questions. First, will you be able to fix the way Scatterer makes Kerbin (And other celestial bodies in the future) look from space? For some reason, when I use Scatterer, from orbit, Kerbin looks to be covered in a Kilometer thick, low lying fog layer, and the only landmass that peaks through it are the mountains. My second question, Are you going to update Kerbol's lens flare, and the way it looks up close for the next iteration? for reference to what I am talking about, here's some photos : http://i.imgur.com/ZZQX6EZ.png http://i.imgur.com/y4ASWVV.png The first one is the way it looks up close and the second is the lens flare itself. Thanks for your time!

A group at NASA’s Johnson Space Center has successfully tested an electromagnetic (EM) propulsion drive in a vacuum – a major breakthrough for a multi-year international effort comprising several competing research teams. Thrust measurements of the EM Drive defy classical physics’ expectations that such a closed (microwave) cavity should be unusable for space propulsion because of the law of conservation of momentum. the EM Drive’s thrust is due to the Quantum Vacuum (the quantum state with the lowest possible energy) behaving like propellant ions behave in a MagnetoHydroDynamics drive (a method electrifying propellant and then directing it with magnetic fields to push a spacecraft in the opposite direction) for spacecraft propulsion.In Dr. White’s model, the propellant ions of the MagnetoHydroDynamics drive are replaced as the fuel source by the virtual particles of the Quantum Vacuum, eliminating the need to carry propellant. That was all from here : http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/evaluating-nasas-futuristic-em-drive/ My basic understanding is that the engine uses microwaves generated from solar electric power to tap into the "quantum vaccum" (In quantum field theory, the vacuum state (also called the vacuum) is the quantum state with the lowest possible energy. Generally, it contains no physical particles. Zero-point field is sometimes used as a synonym for the vacuum state of an individual quantized field. - Wikipedia) The microwaves use the quantum virtual particles in the quantum vaccum as propellant. The engine uses magnetic fileds to propel the particles out the back as thrust. The reason that this is said to defy the laws of physics is because of whats said in the definition "it contains no physical particles." But as you read at the top, NASA has obviously defied this theory and has proven that it is possible to do. NASA speculates that this engine could send a craft to Mars during a transfer window in just 70 days. A bit of other info, A company in Texas has a new engine called the VASMIR that has been estimated to have a 39 day transfer time to mars. Pretty cool stuff.

May I ask how to use ninja ripper to make the trees?