getting reputation by taking pictures of your missions (Telescopes)

[Mister Dilsby]

Huh? Taking pictures of my missions is pretty much how I've gotten all my Rep-- oh. Never mind 

[nikokespprfan]

16 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

That's kind of my point? I tend to think experiments in general are a bit clicky and unfulfilling at the moment because they don't really have a dynamic besides being clicked. Without addressing this adding cameras really only exacerbates the matter. 

Ok, maybe it shouldn't be EXACTLY like the science system, a window that shows you the picture taken would make things so much more interesting (and less like another experiment). Yes, you see whatever is on your picture before you take it, but that doesn't have to be all there is.

There are a lot of things you could implement. It will probably not solve the problem of clicking through experiments becoming boring, but if squad thinks good about this one, it could make exploring alot more interesting.

Possibilies are:

-infrared, gamma, radiowave etc. camera's (great potential to make the planets "fuller", as you could use these pics to see details that are normally "invisible")

-things outside the Kerbol system, just as @Veeltch suggested. (I believe one of the telescope mods do this, too)

-Video recorders,

-sonar camera's

-and many more things

 

In the end it adds immersion and it adds to KSP's ability to teach about space.

[Mikki]

Maybe dropping a static camera on the surface of a planet/ moon of your liking (contract) could be a additional sience experiment, the camera would disable itself (and dissappear...) after a certain time to declutter the games ram for saving, progress execution.

 

[r_rolo1]

I would like very much to have "take pictures of X area" contracts, TBH. People sometimes fail to realize that space programs don't take pictures just for PR reasons, but also ( and mostly ) to gather scientific data, especially regarding the geology of the site in question ( OFC that would mean adding camera(s) to the game as scientific devices  )

[Demian_Scales]

And so on. Contracts there you need take a pic from area X to 90degrees from it, or take a pic of sun/satellite from orbit duna.

Like this idea!

But, I see, that this feature can improve one more feature, if you can use it like iva in a unmanned missions!

[nikokespprfan]

I've added all your suggestions to the first post. (Tell me if I missed some)

 

On 13-1-2016 at 1:52 AM, Demian_Scales said:

But, I see, that this feature can improve one more feature, if you can use it like iva in a unmanned missions!

Cool idea, maybe you could add this to a rover camera.

[rkman]

On 21-12-2015 at 7:14 PM, pandaman said:

IRL cameras are used for real science as well as 'pretty publicity' pictures so it would be a nice extra tool to provide both rep and science.

Primarily for science, any PR value is serendipitous. 

On 27-12-2015 at 3:25 PM, Pthigrivi said:

if landing on or flying by a planet already fulfills a contract then the requirement to take a picture really only ads minutiae.

There could be contracts that require taking x number of photos of specific areas, or (probably much harder to implement) take photos of specific objects (a la Take On Mars). 

On 27-12-2015 at 3:25 PM, Pthigrivi said:

it seems cool and realistic, but the 50th time you have to line up and take a picture is it really going to be fun?

Like the 50th time you take a temperature reading?  

Taking photos is hardly any different, except that due so sheer data volume transmitting photos could get a little more involved than transmitting temperature data. But really, how can there be space exploration without taking photos?  

[Pthigrivi]

2 hours ago, rkman said:

Like the 50th time you take a temperature reading?  

Taking photos is hardly any different, except that due so sheer data volume transmitting photos could get a little more involved than transmitting temperature data. But really, how can there be space exploration without taking photos?  

Yeah that's kind of my point. I think most would agree experiments are a bit tedious at the moment and could really use a closer look. To my mind breaking warp, clicking 5-10 different parts, going through 5-10 different science dialogues, going on Eva, taking an Eva report, downloading 5-10 different experiments, and returning to the capsule a dozen times per mission really starts to pull the player out of the experience. With that the status quo adding cameras really only adds one more thing to click. 

What these experiments really need are individual dynamics, to require the player to run their mission differently in order to satisfy them, and to log and store automatically so players aren't distracted from flying by endlessly fiddling through and clicking parts. I guess my broader question is what would a camera's dynamic be? How is it scored? The closer the better? Does it matter if you're landed or just flying by? Does it matter what you're taking a picture of? Do pictures score differently at night? Does having the picture blocked by your vessel matter? Does taking multiple pictures of the same thing result in diminishing returns? If so how different do two pictures have to be to be unique? If not what prevents me from just chilling in orbit and snapping away to infinite reputation? Most importantly, how is the player informed of these dynamics ahead of time so they can plan worthwhile missions? 

Im not saying cameras couldn't be fun, they could be! I just haven't yet seen someone spell out a clear way in which they would be. I'm just not sure adding one more thing to click, some flavor text (and potentially game-breaking exploits) does it. 

Edited January 17, 2016 by Pthigrivi

[Wjolcz]

7 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Yeah that's kind of my point. I think most would agree experiments are a bit tedious at the moment and could really use a closer look. To my mind breaking warp, clicking 5-10 different parts, going through 5-10 different science dialogues, going on Eva, taking an Eva report, downloading 5-10 different experiments, and returning to the capsule a dozen times per mission really starts to pull the player out of the experience. With that the status quo adding cameras really only adds one more thing to click. 

What these experiments really need are individual dynamics, to require the player to run their mission differently in order to satisfy them, and to log and store automatically so players aren't distracted from flying by endlessly fiddling through and clicking parts. I guess my broader question is what would a camera's dynamic be? How is it scored? The closer the better? Does it matter if you're landed or just flying by? Does it matter what you're taking a picture of? Do pictures score differently at night? Does having the picture blocked by your vessel matter? Does taking multiple pictures of the same thing result in diminishing returns? If so how different do two pictures have to be to be unique? If not what prevents me from just chilling in orbit and snapping away to infinite reputation? Most importantly, how is the player informed of these dynamics ahead of time so they can plan worthwhile missions? 

Im not saying cameras couldn't be fun, they could be! I just haven't yet seen someone spell out a clear way in which they would be. I'm just not sure adding one more thing to click, some flavor text (and potentially game-breaking exploits) does it. 

"Not a fun idea because I can't imagine it being fun. Please, someone come up witha good camera mechanic idea so I can approve it."

Jeez... Maybe you should try and come up with something that would make snapping the pics fun instead of being negative all the time. All that stuff you questioned could be easily dealt with. How would you want it to work, hm?

Edited January 17, 2016 by Veeltch

[Pthigrivi]

Well sorry to get down about it, but I guess what Im saying is I don't think those issues are easily dealt with, and I don't think people are really thinking about the challenges involved. I know it seems simple but taking a picture is a relative act between the point the picture is taken and the field of view being captured. If it matters where you are pointing and how far you are from the object being photographed from a standpoint of scoring (I was x distance when I photographed y object, therefor I receive z rep) then you have to decide how different 2 pictures have to be from each other to be considered unique, otherwise you can just click and click and receive infinite reputation. That's a game breaking exploit. If it doesn't matter where you are or what you're pointing at, if it behaves like a thermometer and you can point it anywhere and it just scores based on what biome you're in then what is the point of it? Its just another thing to click. 

Im not saying it cant work, Im just saying this is actually a more difficult problem than people are making it out to be. 

Edited January 18, 2016 by Pthigrivi

[Wjolcz]

12 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

Well sorry to get down about it, but I guess what Im saying is I don't think those issues are easily dealt with, and I don't think people are really thinking about the challenges involved. I know it seems simple but taking a picture is a relative act between the point the picture is taken and the field of view being captured. If it matters where you are pointing and how far you are from the object being photographed from a standpoint of scoring (I was x distance when I photographed y object, therefor I receive z rep) then you have to decide how different 2 pictures have to be from each other to be considered unique, otherwise you can just click and click and receive infinite reputation. That's a game breaking exploit. If it doesn't matter where you are or what you're pointing at, if it behaves like a thermometer and you can point it anywhere and it just scores based on what biome you're in then what is the point of it? Its just another thing to click. 

Im not saying it cant work, Im just saying this is actually a more difficult problem than people are making it out to be. 

I think a possible way to deal with such issue would be a mechanic based on points scattered around a planrt's surface. The more of those invisible "dots" there are the less focused the photo is, which means you don't get that mich rep/science/whatever other resource.

Think about how GTA SA dealt with taking pictures. There were those bright star things that, when focused with a camera, they revealed an icon that disapeared after taking a snapshot. Something like this except with more such "dots" on a surface of the planet/skybox. If you focused on such a point of interest and took a picture of it it would simply disappear. That would count as a high res picture and there would be no need to photograph it again.

[rkman]

22 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

I guess my broader question is what would a camera's dynamic be? How is it scored? The closer the better? Does it matter if you're landed or just flying by? Does it matter what you're taking a picture of? Do pictures score differently at night? Does having the picture blocked by your vessel matter? Does taking multiple pictures of the same thing result in diminishing returns? If so how different do two pictures have to be to be unique? If not what prevents me from just chilling in orbit and snapping away to infinite reputation? Most importantly, how is the player informed of these dynamics ahead of time so they can plan worthwhile missions? 

 

Valid questions. I think it should either be done like how Take On Mars does it, where both the object or feature that is to be photographed is defined and also the angle/view (though somewhat loosely) at which a photo should be taken, so that you can have several different photos targets of the same the object or feature. But that would probably require a whole lot of manual labor (in TOM only small sections of a planet surface can be explored). I suppose the alternative would be that it is kept much more simple and only checks for general area, day/night, orbit/surface and obstruction by vehicle. 

[tater]

On December 27, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Pthigrivi said:

I think what he means is if landing on or flying by a planet already fulfills a contract then the requirement to take a picture really only ads minutiae. I've seen cameras suggested a number of times, and I'll be honest I don't know what they really add. I mean it seems cool and realistic, but the 50th time you have to line up and take a picture is it really going to be fun?

I'd think that a proper camera part should be more automatic. Think "ScanSat" (mod).

We have a kind of infinite camera view right now, it's called map mode. Tab to a world, then zoom in. The zoom takes you to a position some XX km above the surface. What cameras SHOULD do, is adjust that zoom level based upon the altitude and type of camera used to visit that particular world/spot. The default zoom would be reset to what you could possibly see from Kerbin with a telescope. So the side of the Mun might look as it does now in map mode, but the far side would have the zoom level moved so far out it's just a disk. Duna would be a red disk with ice caps, no other detail, Jool would look as it does from the window of a craft that has just entered the SoI, perhaps.

Cameras would change by tier.

Tier 1:

Video camera mk 1. Low res, moves map zoom to Xkm above the altitude of the craft flying it. (have to work X out)

Large format film camera. High-res. These might be assumed to be in all crewed pods. No transmit at all, must be returned to Kerbin to be developed. Moves map possibly to some fraction of altitude of craft (need to work out long lenses vs scanned area, how does scansat deal with this?)

 

Tier 2:

Camera/developer. Like the cameras used in the Lunar Orbiter missions. Takes images, develops film, scans film for FAX transmission, and can transmit. Limited supplies.

 

Tier 3?:

CCD cameras. Medium res, but can transmit.

 

Tier 4-5?:

High-res CCD cameras. Can transmit.

 

Radar mappers could also be possible for places like Eve (abstracted for clouds, even if not in game).

 

No clicking by the player, though. Place in polar orbit, otherwise you just image a swath under the craft. Ideally it would only image the day side, too.

Edited January 19, 2016 by tater

[Wjolcz]

Also a thought about taking pictures of specific areas: The points of interest on the surface of a planet could be much birghter for a certain amount of time (2 hours per day/every few months aka seasonal changes/constantly birght like the white mountain spot thing on Ceres). Same for events in the sky. They could shine much brighter than other stars for a few days like some supernovae do. That way you could find them easier and have time to point your camera/telescope at it.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Veeltch

[nikokespprfan]

On 22-1-2016 at 6:55 PM, Veeltch said:

Also a thought about taking pictures of specific areas: The points of interest on the surface of a planet could be much birghter for a certain amount of time (2 hours per day/every few months aka seasonal changes/constantly birght like the white mountain spot thing on Ceres). Same for events in the sky. They could shine much brighter than other stars for a few days like some supernovae do. That way you could find them easier and have time to point your camera/telescope at it.

As long as these represent natural phenomena, that could be a nice idea. Could also spark contracts saying "That patch of the sky looks particularly bright recently, maybe you should take a look at it."

[nikokespprfan]

On 17-1-2016 at 5:17 PM, Pthigrivi said:

guess my broader question is what would a camera's dynamic be? How is it scored? The closer the better? Does it matter if you're landed or just flying by? Does it matter what you're taking a picture of? Do pictures score differently at night? Does having the picture blocked by your vessel matter? Does taking multiple pictures of the same thing result in diminishing returns? If so how different do two pictures have to be to be unique? If not what prevents me from just chilling in orbit and snapping away to infinite reputation? Most importantly, how is the player informed of these dynamics ahead of time so they can plan worthwhile missions?

On 18-1-2016 at 1:15 AM, Pthigrivi said:

... then you have to decide how different 2 pictures have to be from each other to be considered unique, otherwise you can just click and click and receive infinite reputation.

I wanted to take some time to answer these questions, as I think they are indeed very important to answer and solve. The biggest problem is uniqueness. That problem can be solved by looking at it differently. Instead of taking the picture as a whole, you look at individual pieces. With any camera part, upon clicking the button for doing the experiment, the game will generate a picture the picture of what the camera was looking at. It will then look the individual pieces that make up the picture, and calculate the science and/or reputation for each of those things. The sum of all those things will be the ultimate yield. This will solve the issue as photographing the same "piece" will yield, just as any other science experiment, diminishing returns. You can kill multiple birds with one stone, but you cannot kill one bird twice, so to speak.

As all of these pieces are balanced, so that the end sum is not ridiculously high, taking one more picture of something you've already photographed a zillion times to get that last bit of things out, will be a very unattractive thing. At the point taking pictures of this body becomes boring, you will have pretty much exhausted most of the "pieces", and those left undiscovered gain such a small amount that it is just not worth it. 

What those pieces are, depends on your camera. From what I've seen suggested the community would like three different types of camera's. Telescopes, that look at the deep skies for planets, asteroids and things outside the Kerbol system, and which gather data over time.

Camera's, that you bring to bodies to take instant pictures. 

And crew held camera's, which make pictures from a pod window and have to be operated by a crew.

 

In all three examples, a hype-factor should play a role. This determines for every "photo piece" how new and important it is to either the scientific community (science) or the public and economy(reputation and contextual contracts).

 

As for the telescope parts, the score should depend on:

The shutter time (You need a lot of data when looking in space, which is mostly empty.).

Whatever it has seen, or not seen.

Other specifications that belong to the type of telescope.

Whether the view is blocked by anything.

 

The camera parts, the scoring depends on:

Points of interest (recycled area waypoints from the contract system. they are always hidden, and only loaded when needed.) that describe interesting geology, easter eggs and other stuff. They have some info that tell the game whether they are on the picture or not (distance and size, clouds, things blocking the view, night/day).

The amount and type of bodies that are on the picture.

Something in any way, shape or form to differentiate between eclipses, rises/sets and "just two bodies on one picture". (Apparent distance)

any body-wide natural phenomenon captured (aurora's, magnetic fields, solar flares)

the type of light your camera is sensitive for (this is also responsible for having aurora's, magnetic fields and solar flares visible)

How sharp the surface appears to be and how much you can see of it (things blocking the view, night, clouds and atmosphere, distance to the surface)

 

Crew-held camera's would probably be similar to the "normal" camera's.

As for the question about informing the player. The end result of any of those rules is that the picture is interpreted in the way a player would. The player doesn't have to know all these rules, as long as he/she/ knows that they work like you'd expect, with the occasional extra mechanic like shutter time.

Miscellaneous parts, like the suggestions for an Atmosphere scanner [Veeltch] and a radar mapper [tater] have their own needs.

[Algiark]

Why not just make the camera a glorified screenshot captor, like in Shadow of Mordor and Arkham Knight? Pick an angle, determine DOF, FOV and exposure (gotta make sure people can see the stars!), apply effects and filter, boom, pretty screenshots for you. Doesn't add much to the gameplay, but it's fun!

 

And if you really want some gameplay mixed, I agree with GTA:SA approach where you photograph landmarks/easter eggs. The composition of the photo doesn't matter, as long as the whole object is caught in a certain size in the frame (not too close and not too far). Maybe the landmark is so small you have to be in walking distance to see it, or so large it can only be seen from orbit, like unique crater formations. And you only know it's a unique landmark by pointing your camera at it, or by having the game drop some random hints to you. Imagine Gene Kerman dropping by while you're controlling a mission and saying "hey, that crater looks weird..."

This is similar to Anomaly Surveyor contracts, but instead of being a contract, it's a passive objective that you just keep in mind while exploring space. The reward shouldn't be one of the currencies, either, because contracts does that already.  Maybe an entry on Science Archives regarding that photographed landmark?

[Pthigrivi]

So after being a mega-downer on this thread I think I've thought of a way to score photographs for reputation and/or science payouts:

What you need is an inverse square equation that factors the value of a given object and distance of the camera to it. This would be tough to scale I think, but it seems logical to me that with the right values this could produce a sensible, intuitive metric for giving more value to photographs the closer they are to a given object. I think for simplicity including any part of an object would award points for it. What could be fun though is including multiple objects within the same frame would give you points for each. You could also award points for capturing anomalies, though the value/distance drop off would be much steeper, from 100% to 0 in a kilometer or so. So say you've landed next to Vallhenge. Snapping a photo by itself would award you full points for Vall plus how close you are to Vallhenge, but if you waited and were able to capture Jool rising or another of Jools moons in the same photo you would receive points for all three. Each object would have a maximum potential value, so once you've snapped the surface its value is essentially spent. If you took two pictures of the same object from the same distance only the first would hold any value. I think you could also add a small multiplier if a kerbal or vessel was included in the frame with the same inverse square value drop off. 

Edited May 11, 2016 by Pthigrivi

[Wjolcz]

3 hours ago, Pthigrivi said:

So after being a mega-downer on this thread I think I've thought of a way to score photographs for reputation and/or science payouts:

What you need is an inverse square equation that factors the value of a given object and distance of the camera to it. This would be tough to scale I think, but it seems logical to me that with the right values this could produce a sensible, intuitive metric for giving more value to photographs the closer they are to a given object. I think for simplicity including any part of an object would award points for it. What could be fun though is including multiple objects within the same frame would give you points for each. You could also award points for capturing anomalies, though the value/distance drop off would be much steeper, from 100% to 0 in a kilometer or so. So say you've landed next to Vallhenge. Snapping a photo by itself would award you full points for Vall plus how close you are to Vallhenge, but if you waited and were able to capture Jool rising or another of Jools moons in the same photo you would receive points for all three. Each object would have a maximum potential value, so once you've snapped the surface its value is essentially spent. If you took two pictures of the same object from the same distance only the first would hold any value. I think you could also add a small multiplier if a kerbal or vessel was included in the frame with the same inverse square value drop off. 

I think I had suggested sth like this already? Ok, maybe I wasn't clear enough:

There would be invisible 'spots' on each body. Each would occupy a, let's say, 5km square. The more of those 'points' in one picture there are the lower the resolution of the photo is. The analogy is simple: let's think about a big hill full of trees. From far away you see it as a hill covered with forest. You take the binoculars and look through them at the hill. Now you see 3-4 trees really well instead of a green hill.

Once the system for that is set up it's all down to limiting the max zoom of the camera part.

[THX1138]

Cool idea

[FleshJeb]

Just an FYI: 

I haven't tried this, but I do play with the HullCam VDS mod. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/42739-11hullcam-vds-nightvision-dockingcam-and-other-filtersupdated1-apr/&page=1 I'm exclusively sandbox, so I just roleplay everything.