[1.2] Real Solar System v12.0 Dec 8

[SpacedInvader]

So producing a practice heightmap is going to take longer than I thought. That being said, does anyone have any ideas / requests as to what simple terrain features should be in there? I've already got some reference hills to help with setting up heightmap deformity properly, as well as a patch of rolling hills and some cliffs, but I'm not sure just what else to put there. Thoughts?

Also, I've started working on the Venus heightmap.

[SpacedInvader]

BTW, does the Moon still need to be done? I remember reading something about 40 pages ago about the Moon being done in one way or another, but I'm not sure if it needed a heightmap and terrain improvements still?

[ANWRocketMan]

BTW, does the Moon still need to be done? I remember reading something about 40 pages ago about the Moon being done in one way or another, but I'm not sure if it needed a heightmap and terrain improvements still?

The heightmaps that are available are relatively low resolution. But other than that it seems to work(if a bit bland and flat).

[SpacedInvader]

The heightmaps that are available are relatively low resolution. But other than that it seems to work(if a bit bland and flat).

I'll see what I can do... I'm sure that extreme resolution elevation data of the Moon have to exist somewhere...

[NathanKell]

The heightmap, color map, and normal map of the moon that AndreyATGB provided don't actually match; looks like they're from different data sets. If anyone has matching color, normal, and heightmaps for the moon, please post!

The Kaguya data is 5760x2880, which should be downscaled to 4096x2048, which should be sufficient for the moon.

[ANWRocketMan]

The Kaguya data is 5760x2880, which should be downscaled to 4096x2048, which should be sufficient for the moon.

Did JAXA use Kaguya for colour maps too?

[SpacedInvader]

I've found the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter data which is up to 128px / deg for elevation (way, way more than we can work with) and includes a camera which has global wide angle coverage. I'm currently downsizing the elevation data to 8192 x 4096 and getting the full coverage visual image as well. I'm not sure about normal map, but would that be the surface roughness map? The LRO also provides that...

[SpacedInvader]

Ok, so I've finished the 8192 x 4096 heightmap of the Moon, and I have the full image from the same satellite as well, though I'm really not impressed with it because it's monochrome and quite dark.I'm drawing a complete blank, however, on where to get a normal map. The surface roughness I mentioned earlier does seem like it might be that, but it's got lots of holes in it that the other two datasets just don't have for some reason. Googling really only produced some links to premade normal maps and also links to creating them in photoshop. Any thoughts about what to do here?

EDIT: A shot from a random point on the Moon with the new map:

EDIT: Here is the heightmap and here is the code to put into the cfg:

PQSMod_VertexHeightMap
				{
					heightMapDeformity = 19905.0 //7500
					heightMap = GameData/RealSolarSystem/Plugins/PluginData/MoonHeight.png
				}

Edited April 18, 2014 by SpacedInvader

[Starwaster]

Ok, so I've finished the 8192 x 4096 heightmap of the Moon, and I have the full image from the same satellite as well, though I'm really not impressed with it because it's monochrome and quite dark.I'm drawing a complete blank, however, on where to get a normal map. The surface roughness I mentioned earlier does seem like it might be that, but it's got lots of holes in it that the other two datasets just don't have for some reason. Googling really only produced some links to premade normal maps and also links to creating them in photoshop. Any thoughts about what to do here?

EDIT: A shot from a random point on the Moon with the new map:

http://i.imgur.com/nk7ogO7.png

EDIT: Here is the heightmap and here is the code to put into the cfg:

PQSMod_VertexHeightMap
				{
					heightMapDeformity = 19905.0 //7500
					heightMap = GameData/RealSolarSystem/Plugins/PluginData/MoonHeight.png
				}

If you're happy with that height map I should be able to produce a normal map from it.

[SpacedInvader]

If you're happy with that height map I should be able to produce a normal map from it.

I think it's probably good... the deformity value of 19905 is the elevation difference from low to high for the Moon and the heightmap resolution is as high as we're going to get. The actual output tiff from the mapping program I'm using is something like 46000px x 23000px, so it's good interpolated data rather than extrapolated from something smaller.

EDIT: Plus, any noise functions we tweak in the future are not going to alter the overall height of the terrain by more than a couple hundred meters, so I think that won't affect the difference between the normal map and the heightmap once we get the generic loader and are able to really tweak the terrain.

[Starwaster]

I think it's probably good... the deformity value of 19905 is the elevation difference from low to high for the Moon and the heightmap resolution is as high as we're going to get. The actual output tiff from the mapping program I'm using is something like 46000px x 23000px, so it's good interpolated data rather than extrapolated from something smaller.

EDIT: Plus, any noise functions we tweak in the future are not going to alter the overall height of the terrain by more than a couple hundred meters, so I think that won't affect the difference between the normal map and the heightmap once we get the generic loader and are able to really tweak the terrain.

Ok still working on this. You. SHOULD be able to download it already but that gawdawfully huge image is intent on strangling the life out of my computer and its puny 4 gb.

Photoshop just crashed shutting off non essentials and trying again.

Question: does the normal map have to be same size? I'm assuming that's what you want but it would go a long ways to not-killing my computer if it were not.

Edit: Done. Uploading it. There were some VERY tense moments when I tried to save and the PC seemed to hang for a few minutes.

Edited April 19, 2014 by Starwaster

[SpacedInvader]

Ok still working on this. You. SHOULD be able to download it already but that gawdawfully huge image is intent on strangling the life out of my computer and its puny 4 gb.

Photoshop just crashed shutting off non essentials and trying again.

Question: does the normal map have to be same size? I'm assuming that's what you want but it would go a long ways to not-killing my computer if it were not.

I'm guessing it would need to be the case, though this isn't an area where I'm very well versed. Alternatively, you can walk me through the process and I can use my 16GB to take a whack at it. I'm also curious about how we can go about making the colormap using this image:

It's not perfect as it has some stitch lines and the poles don't look all that great, but its from the same dataset as the heightmap, so it should line up perfectly once I correct for the 90° shift that KSP imparts. I'm guessing we don't want to just use it as is and that there is some degree of processing that needs to be done? I'm also still going through all of the output data from the LRO to see if there is a better image to work with.

[Starwaster]

I'm guessing it would need to be the case, though this isn't an area where I'm very well versed. Alternatively, you can walk me through the process and I can use my 16GB to take a whack at it. I'm also curious about how we can go about making the colormap using this image:

<snip!>

It's not perfect as it has some stitch lines and the poles don't look all that great, but its from the same dataset as the heightmap, so it should line up perfectly once I correct for the 90° shift that KSP imparts. I'm guessing we don't want to just use it as is and that there is some degree of processing that needs to be done? I'm also still going through all of the output data from the LRO to see if there is a better image to work with.

Normal Map is done but it's 113 mb so it's still uploading. (ADSL so upload is slower)

If you want to try it in the future, you need a normal map filter for photoshop. I use NVidia's which is downloadable from their site I presume. I don't remember where I got it exactly; I've had it for years.

Re: the color map.... ugh, it's got a lot of shadowing and stitch lines... but also what looks like scan lines... I'm not sure how to get rid of all that except slowly going over it section by section. I wonder if we could superimpose the height map over it and... use that as a reference or filter.....

Edit: PMed you the link

[SpacedInvader]

113MB?!?! That's a little crazy... But it prompted me to go and do what I should have done in the first place and have a look at the EarthNRM.png file already in RSS to see how big it is. Turns out, while the height map and color map are both 8192x4096, the normal map is only 2048x1024. Perhaps we should limit that file down to save RAM usage and keep it in line with what's already in place.

As far as making the normal map, I'd tried to use that plugin, but always got the message that it needed to be an RGB file with three or four channels selected, so I just assumed that you couldn't do it with a gray scale heightmap.

Yeah, I agree the image isn't the best, though I've yet to find a decent shadow free composite that wasn't obviously a composite with hard lines where the different layers exist. As for using the height map as a filter, it's not a bad idea. My thinking is to invert it so the craters are lighter and then maybe a lighter colors filter? The problem is going to be the scan / layer lines, which don't seem to want to go away, even with various attempts to blur or smooth them out. That being said, I'm still looking for a better source image.

Edited April 19, 2014 by SpacedInvader

[Starwaster]

113MB?!?! That's a little crazy... But it prompted me to go and do what I should have done in the first place and have a look at the EarthNRM.png file already in RSS to see how big it is. Turns out, while the height map and color map are both 8192x4096, the normal map is only 2048x1024. Perhaps we should limit that file down to save RAM usage and keep it in line with what's already in place.

As far as making the normal map, I'd tried to use that plugin, but always got the message that it needed to be an RGB file with three or four channels selected, so I just assumed that you couldn't do it with a gray scale heightmap.

Yeah, I agree the image isn't the best, though I've yet to find a decent shadow free composite that wasn't obviously a composite with hard lines where the different layers exist. As for using the height map as a filter, it's not a bad idea. My thinking is to invert it so the craters are lighter and then maybe a lighter colors filter? The problem is going to be the scan / layer lines, which don't seem to want to go away, even with various attempts to blur or smooth them out. That being said, I'm still looking for a better source image.

In Photoshop,

Image -> Mode -> RGB

It's that easy. Now your grayscale image is an RGB image.

That just happens to still look grayscale.

I used the add height and average RGB (as height) options.

You should also check wrap mode which is for textures that wrap seamlessly. Otherwise weird things might happen at the edges.

And... omg is Levi related to Mikasa???? Holy crap.

[Sternface]

I've taken a little break from KSP.

But with all this work on the heightmaps and terrain, I may have to get back into it

I keep switching between RSS and stock - I love the design aspects and realism of RSS, but I love exploring the cool terrain on stock.

Seems like I might be sticking with RSS once .24 comes out.

Nice work SpacedInvader + the usual suspects! Appreciate it.

[SpacedInvader]

I've taken a little break from KSP.

But with all this work on the heightmaps and terrain, I may have to get back into it

I keep switching between RSS and stock - I love the design aspects and realism of RSS, but I love exploring the cool terrain on stock.

Seems like I might be sticking with RSS once .24 comes out.

Nice work SpacedInvader + the usual suspects! Appreciate it.

Awe shucks! T'aint nuthin

I'm just a little surprised that all of the GIS / Cartography skills I learned in college are getting put to use making a mod for a game

[SpacedInvader]

So I found a better version of the moon surface image. It still has the shadows, but most of the scan / stitch lines are gone except a couple near the poles and maybe at the copy-paste line where I move 90° to the other side... haven't gotten that far yet because the thing is 5.5GB currently, so I'm going to need to downsample the thing to 8192x4096. That being said, shadows alone might be easier to deal with than shadows and lots of lines... I'll put up the proper sized link tonight when I get home from work and have a chance to put some time into it.

[NathanKell]

I would suggest maybe a 4096x2048 heightmap for the moon, and maybe even 2048 color and 1024 normal. I *do* have an 8192 normal available for Earth in the OP but the "standard" RSS size is 2048, like in stock KSP.

I would therefore suggest at least defaulting to those sizes above, with the option for hirez moon, etc--I really want to avoid RSS taking 500mb all by itself, if that can be avoided (though rbray is right to suggest "quick n dirty" paging as a way around this).

[SpacedInvader]

I would suggest maybe a 4096x2048 heightmap for the moon, and maybe even 2048 color and 1024 normal. I *do* have an 8192 normal available for Earth in the OP but the "standard" RSS size is 2048, like in stock KSP.

I would therefore suggest at least defaulting to those sizes above, with the option for hirez moon, etc--I really want to avoid RSS taking 500mb all by itself, if that can be avoided (though rbray is right to suggest "quick n dirty" paging as a way around this).

Ok, we can put together two packages or at least offer high resolution maps for those who want them. One thing I will point out, however, is that we only have such detailed information for the four inner planets and the Moon, everything else is most likely just going to need lower resolution color and normal maps.

This also brings up the question of how we want to handle the outer planet moons. Should we try to mimic what we know of their surface with custom height maps, or should we just stretch out the stock height maps to the approximate correct variation in elevation?

[davjet]

Can someone help me? For some reason when I have the real solar system mod installed all the buildings appear under the terrain making the game unplayable because rockets will hit the terrain ceiling.

[NathanKell]

Probably not installed correctly. Please install exactly as specified in the readme. If you still have problems, please launch KSP, quit, and post your ksp/KSP_Data/output_log.txt.

SpacedInvader: I'd say let's go with what we know, and use procedural terrain to give it more detail.

[SpacedInvader]

SpacedInvader: I'd say let's go with what we know, and use procedural terrain to give it more detail.

Ok, if you give me a list of moons we're going to do, probably both for using stock planets and also PF planets, I'll start looking for good imagery for them. I think if I can find at least hemispherical shots, we'll be able to do a pretty good job of synthesizing some decent terrain.

[NathanKell]

I'd say just start from the list in the OP, and then move on to any that aren't listed in the OP (which will be motivation for me to finally put planet-adding support in RSS...)

[AndreyATGB]

You'll be surprised how few images there are for distant planets (read: not Mars and Venus).