[KSP 1.6.1] Stock Visual Enhancements [v1.4.1] [20 March 2019]

[Joshwoo70]

Just now, Nhawks17 said:

I don't think looking at one image makes his statement invalid. I would personally request that any further information on this subject be in private between Galileo and Astronomer as this can start unnecessary drama and the moderators might swoop in on the thread.

correct. and thus. closing the issue.

[Galileo]

3 hours ago, Astronomer said:

Dear Galileo, none of what I am about to say is satire. I merely wish to state my views on art and how I think should evolve over time.

You are a gentleman and a scholar. I admire the work that you've done and only wish I could do the things you do. I have been away from the forums for almost 2 years, but that's not to say that my passion for KSP has waned a single day (I'll explain all the stale smelly 2009 memes). I have never stopped playing. Today, I am happy to say that not only do I have more time in my life, but also inspiration from people like yourself to continue to work on the old forgotten cancer that AVP is and bring it back to its former glory.  

My pack started off as just a few files I wanted to change, simply because at the time no one else did. All of the files which I include in my pack I made from scratch with my hand. To create some files I did use textures I found online to help start off the creation of my textures. While few of those have only undergone several iterations of formatting to work with the game, the vast majority came from countless hours of work for every single texture. I have invested my blood, sweat, and tears to make the pack my own, and to say the least, I hereby depose that I have never used a single texture from any other visual pack.

However, there is this one small thing that I wish to address that has come to my attention. When I was using your pack some aspects felt familiar. Very familiar. Upon closer inspection, I quickly found out that a lot of assets originate from my visual pack, as well as other packs (please correct me if I'm wrong) that have existed for around 2 years.

 

"This gives your stock KSP a bit of eye candy! It is no longer a port of RVE as I am creating all of the textures myself"

This is simply not true. Well, the first statement is true, but you forgot to mention just how many textures you have taken from my pack.

 

I will believe you if you say you have done minor edits to my assets,

I believe your plan is to make your own versions of all the textures, which if you do I have no more words to say besides that I respect you, as well as your decision to use these assets as they fall under the license which I had included in my pack. However my upcoming release will fall under a different license. I just wanted to ensure there won't be any unnecessary demurrer over an issue of such prima facie nature. I have no intention of telling you what to do, but I really rather not™ let this go on unnoticed. If you are wondering if I am ever going to hold you up for this, my answer is no: That's what stale memes are for.

On that note, all the programming work you've done is really out there on a whole different level, and on behalf of the KSP community I must express just how awesome it is to be alive at such a time of our technological achievement and your artistic feat! Let me know if you need advice on how I made my textures. Keep me posted.

Im am not entirely sure what you are talking about but this is the most backhanded compliment i have recieved in a long time.

I took this mod over from @Nhawks17 in June. Since then, SVE has been the ONLY visual pack out there that is always current with the latest KSP version. 

 The only textures I remember seeing that may have been from one of your packs were 2 that were used for Jool if i am correct.  Yes i took some inspiration from you. I most definitely took inspiration and when i began working on this mod MANY fans of the mod wanted me to create some things that looked like your work. I obliged. Why wouldnt I? Your work WAS so good.

 

3 hours ago, Astronomer said:

I will believe you if you say you have done minor edits to my assets, but for that to make it fair to say that you've created all of these textures while providing 0 credit and asking people to donate is downright contemptuous.

Now this gets under my skin a little. 
 

Lets proceed.

3 hours ago, Astronomer said:

to say that you've created all of these textures while providing 0 credit

"This gives your stock KSP a bit of eye candy! It is no longer a port of RVE as I am creating all of the textures myself"

It says "I am creating" not "I created" I am still actively working on this and making new textures all the time. Sorry if that led you astray. I have also been given a few textures from other players like @Tekener and some may have been from EVE itself. I put so much time and work into SVE and my other mods for you to say otherwise 

I wont deny that 2 of the Jool textures are from your pack after further inspection and i will credit you if that's what you want. Other than that, I have done damn near everything myself. Also your license did indeed allow it as you said. So whats the deal here? What this looks like to me is a chance to get attention. Otherwise, this could have been done in the personal messenger.  So, if you want to try to discredit MY hard work and hours on Photoshop and Illustrator so you can promote the return of "astronomer's whatever", thats fine but don't tell me my effort isn't worth a few small donations. I'm excited that you are back and I'm looking forward to friendly competition. All I'm trying to do here is push the envelope of what a visual pack can be in KSP.  I dont expect to continue this conversation further than this as i am currently working on an update for 1.2.

 

That being said,
anybody that wants to support to my coffee addiction, please consider donating.
 

 

 

 

Edited October 12, 2016 by Galileo

[Cetera]

@Astronomer, that is some of the worst passive-aggressive attention whoring I've ever seen, anywhere, ever.  You brought this out into public first without evidence, without a private discussion, and then later say you might be mistaken, it might be a misunderstanding, but you do have evidence (that you haven't posted).
 

I'm calling you out.  Post proof, or retract.  Period.  You've made a public mess, and now you're either going to have this out in public, and win, or take your medicine in public.  The absolutely very last thing anything associated with Squad needs right now is more BS drama.

So let's have it.  Post your evidence, accuse Galileo of fraud and thievery, and lets have done.  If not, I'd ask for your account to be perma-banned.  We don't need that around here.

[Astronomer]

3 minutes ago, Joshwoo70 said:

Show it to us and prove that it is yours. (Actions speak louder than words.)

1. Wrong you can bee taken down for the content.

PS: downloading the original pack. having a look at it myself.

I see what you're saying. If a mod needs to edit my post so be it. I don't see what a stale 2009 meme has to do with anything I said. Nevertheless, for evidence look below.

16 minutes ago, Nhawks17 said:

Would you mind clarifying where you suspect elements have been pulled from? I've worked closely with Galileo since transitioning SVE development from myself to him and I have a very hard time believing he would wrongly claim work that was not his.... I could be mistaken but from what I've seen, I would think his claims were true 

 

P.S. All love from my end, your visual packs are what got me interested in starting SVE originally (and of course RVE) and working to make the game look as great as your packs did in the old days.

I did not want to do this, but from the best of my ability, this is the list of files which originate in some way from my pack:

Joolalto.dds - literally the same as altostratus.png texture with some opacity differences.

This one stood out to me the most because it is the least modified from the one that's in my pack.

From the best I can tell, AuroraDetail.dds has the same detail textures as my detailAurora.png.

duststorms.dds Hard to say if it was made from scratch or is just extremely similar to storm.png from an older release of AVP.

The kerbin textures look similar, but I believe Nhawks made these (Low.dds and duna1.png). I'm very jealous to say the least.

Before I forget, I just want to point out that I admire the Storm.dds idea.

Similar but very weak case with Mars2.dds and kerbin1.png.

atmo.dds is identical to detaileve1.png. I am assuming it does the same thing, but since this image is basically a white square I can only wonder who came up with this idea first. Not that I personally care, about this one but there it is.

Some other images look similar, but this is clearly because we have derived them the same way. Is this the case for the rest of the images? I doubt it, but it's been too long at this point for me to remember exactly how I made each texture. Majority are nothing like the textures I have, and once again I'm jealous. But these few irrefutable cases made me ask questions and raise positive discussion. If you already cannot tell, coming back I am currently overwhelmed by nostalgia and desire to create. I sincerely apologize for bringing more attention than warranted over this. If anyone has answers or smosh videos please post them because now that I've laid out the evidence, I am as equally lost as the rest of you wonderful people following this story on as to what happened here.

[Cetera]

So, we have a Jool texture that appears to be the same (and is acknowledged as such, from another pack, and followed the released license), and a lot of other "well, maybe, they kinda look similar" textures, and one where a blank white square was used in both packs.  Gee, I be no one has ever generated a blank white square to use somewhere before.  I bet no one could ever recreate that.

@Astronomer, you owe a big, BIG apology to @Galileo.  You should be ashamed of yourself.  I think you're in the wrong profession.  Have you ever considered running for public office?  

 

[Nhawks17]

I again have to beg to move this discussion to a private conversation if this needs to continue. This is going to get us nowhere arguing here.

[sDaZe]

13 minutes ago, Astronomer said:

Words. 

I worked along side Berlin, who is now called Galileo. I remember him and I staying up literally all night because he was working his butt off in photoshop. The man literally stayed up for days making this mod what it is now, He posted images of the incomplete textures on steam which are now lost, i can tell you for a fact that he made literally almost all of these textures from scratch or just redid the ones @Nhawks17 had, since it was a remake of sve. I've been playing ksp since .24.2 and i admired your work, the only other person who came close was Proot. You and him were literally changing the game and still are. That being said im excited to see what you release tomorrow, there is no such thing as having to many cloud packs. 
Thanks for coming back, 

Daze. 

Edited October 12, 2016 by sDaZe

[Galileo]

32 minutes ago, Astronomer said:

I see what you're saying. If a mod needs to edit my post so be it. I don't see what a stale 2009 meme has to do with anything I said. Nevertheless, for evidence look below.

I did not want to do this, but from the best of my ability, this is the list of files which originate in some way from my pack:

Joolalto.dds - literally the same as altostratus.png texture with some opacity differences.

This one stood out to me the most because it is the least modified from the one that's in my pack.

duststorms.dds Hard to say if it was made from scratch or is just extremely similar to storm.png from an older release of AVP.

The kerbin textures look similar, but I believe Nhawks made these (Low.dds and duna1.png). I'm very jealous to say the least.

Before I forget, I just want to point out that I admire the Storm.dds idea.

Similar but very weak case with Mars2.dds and kerbin1.png.

atmo.dds is identical to detaileve1.png. I am assuming it does the same thing, but since this image is basically a white square I can only wonder who came up with this idea first. Not that I personally care, about this one but there it is.

Some other images look similar, but this is clearly because we have derived them the same way. Is this the case for the rest of the images? I doubt it, but it's been too long at this point for me to remember exactly how I made each texture. Majority are nothing like the textures I have, and once again I'm jealous. But these few irrefutable cases made me ask questions and raise positive discussion. If you already cannot tell, coming back I am currently overwhelmed by nostalgia and desire to create. I sincerely apologize for bringing more attention than warranted over this. If anyone has answers or smosh videos please post them because now that I've laid out the evidence, I am as equally lost as the rest of you wonderful people following this story on as to what happened here.

AuroraDetail i made from scratch. sorry if its close? the technique works. 

Duststorms i recieved from @Tekener where he got it, i dont know. 

atmo is seriously a transparent 32x16 rectangle. You got me. if you didn't notice my irresponsibly large Atmosphere.dds right next to im sorry. It may even just be a white square i dont think i have ever used it

Kerbin 1 Found the texture online. Had to make it transparent to use it. (photoshop magic) The old kerbin1 had seams. my source here http://www.shadedrelief.com/natural3/pages/clouds.html 

Mars2 is from SSRSS, another mod i worked on with @sDaZe. i believe he may have got the texture from RVE. which this mod used to be a port of so it wouldnt suprize me if it was here from the beginning.

detaileve1 has been in the pack since the mod was created if im not mistaken

I already said the Jool texture was yours.

I think, at this point, you are stretching. Anything else?

 

Edited October 12, 2016 by Galileo

[Astronomer]

 

12 minutes ago, Cetera said:

@Astronomer, that is some of the worst passive-aggressive attention whoring I've ever seen, anywhere, ever.  You brought this out into public first without evidence, without a private discussion, and then later say you might be mistaken, it might be a misunderstanding, but you do have evidence (that you haven't posted).
 

I'm calling you out.  Post proof, or retract.  Period.  You've made a public mess, and now you're either going to have this out in public, and win, or take your medicine in public.  The absolutely very last thing anything associated with Squad needs right now is more BS drama.

So let's have it.  Post your evidence, accuse Galileo of fraud and thievery, and lets have done.  If not, I'd ask for your account to be perma-banned.  We don't need that around here.

As much as I wish to keep the wishes of Nhawks17, I must clear up the fact that I have never stated that Galileo has stolen from me or has committed fraud against me. I understand the perspective you are coming from, but to quote myself here - I have made it very clear that it is not only my pack I am talking about: "a lot of assets originate from my visual pack, as well as other packs (please correct me if I'm wrong)". I could recognize the rest of the individual assets, but I did not know that they were all from Nhawks17's pack. And secondly I have made it much clearer that this is not a direct attack of person, but of the case at hand: "I merely wish to state my views on art and how I think should evolve over time.", "I respect you, as well as your decision to use these assets as they fall under the license which I had included in my pack. However my upcoming release will fall under a different license.", "If you are wondering if I am ever going to hold you up for this, my answer is no", etc. Once again: to say that I have an issue with Galileo is to get as far from truth as Saganly possible.

[Galileo]

11 minutes ago, Astronomer said:

 

As much as I wish to keep the wishes of Nhawks17, I must clear up the fact that I have never stated that Galileo has stolen from me or has committed fraud against me. I understand the perspective you are coming from, but to quote myself here - I have made it very clear that it is not only my pack I am talking about: "a lot of assets originate from my visual pack, as well as other packs (please correct me if I'm wrong)". I could recognize the rest of the individual assets, but I did not know that they were all from Nhawks17's pack. And secondly I have made it much clearer that this is not a direct attack of person, but of the case at hand: "I merely wish to state my views on art and how I think should evolve over time.", "I respect you, as well as your decision to use these assets as they fall under the license which I had included in my pack. However my upcoming release will fall under a different license.", "If you are wondering if I am ever going to hold you up for this, my answer is no", etc. Once again: to say that I have an issue with Galileo is to get as far from truth as Saganly possible.

I appreciate the clarity here. I apologize if this is coming off as bad as i think it is. I am a bit annoyed to be honest. I am an army vet and having good character and work ethic is something i pride myself on. So i think you can understand that when someone attacks my character, i am going to fight to show them that they are wrong. Im not saying that you were completely wrong as i did have jool textures in my mod. I just wanted to be clear that my intention with this mod was not to rip off of AVP in anyway. My mod looks nothing like AVP did. Thats due to many reasons like EVE changing and growing. Scatterer being amazing but a lot of it is also the work i have put into my textures. I think we can agree that we are both pretty skilled with image editing and there are only so many ways to skin a cat. Our work was more than likely to overlap at some point with EVE having its limitations. Again im looking forward to seeing your work again on the forums.

Edited October 12, 2016 by Galileo

[Cetera]

2 minutes ago, Astronomer said:

 

As much as I wish to keep the wishes of Nhawks17, I must clear up the fact that I have never stated that Galileo has stolen from me or has committed fraud against me. I understand the perspective you are coming from, but to quote myself here - I have made it very clear that it is not only my pack I am talking about: "a lot of assets originate from my visual pack, as well as other packs (please correct me if I'm wrong)". I could recognize the rest of the individual assets, but I did not know that they were all from Nhawks17's pack. And secondly I have made it much clearer that this is not a direct attack of person, but of the case at hand: "I merely wish to state my views on art and how I think should evolve over time.", "I respect you, as well as your decision to use these assets as they fall under the license which I had included in my pack. However my upcoming release will fall under a different license.", "If you are wondering if I am ever going to hold you up for this, my answer is no", etc. Once again: to say that I have an issue with Galileo is to get as far from truth as Saganly possible.

No, you were very clear and trying to parse legalese to have plausible deniability as you publicly accused him anyway.  Hence, see my comment about the wrong profession.

Currently it looks like you have all license info pointing to http://kerbal.curseforge.com/ksp-mods/220335-astronomers-visual-pack/license, which says "All Rights Reserved unless otherwise explicitly stated."  You apparently didn't follow the forum rules requiring you to post the license in the thread.  Instead, you've provided a link to a different page that you can modify and update after-the-fact, a TOS violation of these boards.

I'm having a hard time finding the original license your work was released under.  Perhaps you are unaware that it is against copyright law to change a license to a more restrictive license?  Attempts to do so can be used to strip all copyrights from the original holder.  You can only relax licensing terms, not restrict them further.  If you are using any pre-existing textures from your packs released with a less restrictive license, you cannot then release the new pack under a more restrictive license.

I really get the feeling that you just maybe don't belong in the KSP community at all.

I stick by my original desire of a perma-ban for you from these boards and this community.

[sDaZe]

4 minutes ago, Cetera said:

I really get the feeling that you just maybe don't belong in the KSP community at all.

I stick by my original desire of a perma-ban for you from these boards and this community.

What he said was bad and not right, sure. 
But to say he doesnt belong in the Kummunity is a little far. The guy has done more than enough to the community in the past years, and tbh is a ksp legend ( If thats a thing ) 
 

Edited October 12, 2016 by sDaZe

[Putnam]

Yeah, calling for a permaban for something like this is a bit bizarre.

[Cetera]

Please, he wasn't that big of a deal, and his work wasn't that great.  Proot's was always better, and ran better, than Astronomer's packs.  It doesn't really matter, though.  He purposefully attacked a legitimate modder in public with copyright violations, then said he may have made a mistake, then said he didn't want to post proof, but did so less than an hour after his original post with the attack (meaning, he clearly did, and already had everything ready to go), his "proof" is proof of nothing, and even admits it, just that it is similar, and furthermore relies on the fact that there exists a blank white square texture in both packs!

How much more ridiculous can you get?  I don't care what he has done in the past.  He's behaved maliciously here, made baseless accusations against a good-standing member of the community who currently is doing great things for us, has violated the licensing terms for mods on the board (which were put in to place specifically to combat the types of shenanigans he is pulling), and then is trying to use legalese to lie his way out of it and say this is all no big deal when he's called out on it.

I call BS.  This is the worst behavior I've ever seen out of anyone associated with KSP, ever.  It is disgraceful, and he needs to be virtually tarred and feathered for it.

[Andem]

1 minute ago, Putnam said:

Yeah, calling for a permaban for something like this is a bit bizarre.

Well, technically, breaking TOS can result in a permaban. It would not surprise me if it's been done before, especiallyif they're also breaking copyright law.

@Red Iron Crown?

[Galileo]

Id like all comments about this subject to cease. Thank you

[Joshwoo70]

1 minute ago, Galileo said:

Id like all comments about this subject to cease. Thank you

agreed. stopping now would be better for all.

[Draconomial]

It's all been in Squad spirit, I think.

[Jim Meillente]

@Galileo

Thank you for your work on this mod and I look forward to the update!

 

[Galileo]

Just now, Jim Meillente said:

@Galileo

Thank you for your work on this mod and I look forward to the update!

 

uploading now!

[Galileo]

OK Github is being extremley slow, the update will have to wait until morning as i have a class at 6am and its currently 1:25am here. If i dont get to bed now i will likely die in the morning.. Sorry! 

[Novak]

Thx Galileo !!

[Cetera]

Thanks, Galileo.  I really appreciate all the effort and hard work you've put into this and other work for us here that play KSP.  You make it a better game.  Thank you for all your efforts!

[theJesuit]

Thank you in advance of the morning!  

[Galileo]

6 minutes ago, theJesuit said:

Thank you in advance of the morning!  

couldnt sleep. How does 15 min sound?