It would be similar to not being able to see the forest because of all the trees blocking ones view.
What do nebula really look like?
My dream is for a Milky Way "band" that mirrors what I see IRL when I look up at the sky. Where I live, that band is very visible, and it looks nothing like what ED gives us by default. I'm guessing this is hard to achieve in Stellar Forge. I also wish the constellations were as obvious in ED as they are IRL. So I guess "amazingly realistic" is relative, LOL.
You have to keep in mind, that views in space are very different from that, what we experience on Earth. "Here" we have the albedo from the surface, electric lights (almost nowhere on this planet we're free from it, despite North-Korea that is), atmospheric pollution and diffusion. "space-view" is much more cruel, harder, has more "contrast". and away from any lightsource, like the Sun, you will see much more stars than we're able to see "here".
If you knew where I live and the views I get (especially in winter), you would be less emphatic about the differences. But I don't want to debate it too much, because I'm a very private person who wants to keep his real-life location a secret
Plenty of deserts and taiga free of light pollution.
If you knew where I live and the views I get (especially in winter), you would be less emphatic about the differences. But I don't want to debate it too much, because I'm a very private person who wants to keep his real-life location a secret
The things you mentioned here are, generally, correct. The other obstacles are still counting.
These are the main reasons why "we're" spending millions of dollars launching telescopes into orbit to get a clear view into the depths of space.You might be right about Stellar Forge. There was a comment in the old livestream about it, that they had to substantially bump up the dust levels in the galactic plane because otherwise the Milky Way was coming out way too bright. Considering that there's a lot of dust, and even with all that it's still too bright, one suspects there's something going on more involved than just an intensity number they could tone down.
To conclude this thread: what we call realistic is only the way we see it from Earth. It is not the way how it really is. We humans on Earth are like wearing sunglasses in front of a huge light source. The sunglasses are the Earth's atmosphere and the huge light source is the sun. We don't really know how things look when we are away from Earth and especially between the stars where it is way darker than here.
Without doubt. The mere presence of atmosphere is enough to make it worth the effort.
Depends what you mean by "we", general audience or people who actually research stuff like this.
You'll need to apply for your moderator badge before you can "conclude" any thread. Ego much?
The things you mentioned here are, generally, correct. The other obstacles are still counting.
DEPTHS of space being key. The effects of the atmosphere (assuming low-humidity, high altitude, and limited pollution) on what we see with the NAKED EYE is very different than looking through the magnification effects of a powerful telescope. My 1080p laptop screen looks wonderful to me, until I break out a magnifying glass.
AFAIK "Both". To be honest, even professionals are only having a slight idea how space things look like outside the sun's glare. All pictures "we" get are either waves on an ocilloscope or greatly enhanced photographs of all the various wavelenghts.
You can remove the dust while keeping the galactic core, just set dust intensity to -0.1. It looks awful IMO, so I'd rather have the dust or nothing at all (the latter requiring that mod).
Why are you people obsessed about sun glare? There is no "glare" in the vacuum of space. At midnight on a day with no visible moon, the sky you see will be the same regardless if there was a sun, no sun, or a sun 10x as bright. Unlike ED where the sun tints the skybox, this is not how RL works.
Too many people in this thread pretending to be astronomers, yet clearly you know not of what you speak.
I'm didn't point on magnification...away from any lightsource even with your own eyes you wouldn't recognize any constellation at all. think of it. like you're standing on the farside of Pluto. You can't even imagine HOW dark darkness can be and how bright all those stars / nebulars appear. It's almost terrifiing.
I can only make one comparision: Think of it like you was almost blind all the time and from one minute to the other you can see als clear as an eagle.
I doubt that, considering the underlying physics here is pretty well understood, the most important issue being interstellar dust I surmise. Maolagin would probably have a more educated say on this though.
You would instantly going blind, if you wozuld look into the sun without any filters like our atmosphere. I'd call that pretty bright.
You only go blind by staring INTO the sun (like Donald Trump). Look in the opposite direction of the sun, and those photons will zip right past you into the void of space, not a one hitting your eye unless it bounces of something like the moon first.
Now if you are changing the topic to how the sun looks dim from our cockpits in ED, then I totally agree, and I wish there was mod to fix that.
Space is not 'black'. It is the limitations of human vision that makes it faint and black.
I reality, the full spectrum view of the universe is a plethora of colorful variations of wavelengths, from infinity to infinity. We can only perceive a very narrow band from gamma to radar, but there is no end to the wavelengths in either spectrum.
There is a video clip on youtube where you can witness what the universe really looks like, when compressing the gamma to radar wavelengths into human visual spectrum.
This will be the standard way of viewing the universe in the future. No reason to view it any other way, unless you want information of a specific band of wavelengths (like infrared or human visual spectrum etc).
I reality, the full spectrum view of the universe is a plethora of colorful variations of wavelengths, from infinity to infinity. We can only perceive a very narrow band from gamma to radar, but there is no end to the wavelengths in either spectrum.
There is a video clip on youtube where you can witness what the universe really looks like, when compressing the gamma to radar wavelengths into human visual spectrum.
This will be the standard way of viewing the universe in the future. No reason to view it any other way, unless you want information of a specific band of wavelengths (like infrared or human visual spectrum etc).
Did you ignore this entire thread? Anyway, if you want bright glowing unrealistic nebula, don't use the mod
i did and nothing implies 'nebulae are invisible'. they're just not like in the pictures, nor how the game exaggerates them (with varying success) which is obviously not realistic, but removing the dust completely isn't either. it's sometimes definitely visible somehow under certain conditions and from the places in space the game allows you to go. even if it can just be 'seen' as a shadow, because it is blocking light. i like a black sky too but if you want to be realistic you need to replace that shader, not simply drop it
We humans tend to speak relative to our five senses. I'm typing on a black laptop, even though it's glowing brightly in the infrared spectrum. Tonight the sun will set, even though it's actually the earth rotating. My hands are clean, even though they are covered in bacteria and micro-bugs and....
But if you really want to win the argument of semantics, you should have just said, "Space is not black because you're playing inside an Oculus Rift S." Sadly, even black space is far from black for me!