ENG New site

Advanced search
Old login form
[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Known issues and bug reports - SpaceEngine 0.97 (Please post here any bugs you find in SpaceEngine)
Known issues and bug reports - SpaceEngine 0.97
HarbingerDawnDate: Wednesday, 01.05.2013, 06:26 | Message # 1
Cosmic Curator
Group: Administrators
United States
Messages: 8717
Status: Offline
Please post here all of your reports about bugs or crashes in SpaceEngine. Before you post any bugs, please follow these steps:

  • Read the Troubleshooting for SpaceEngine 0.97. It is possible that your problem can be solved there.

  • Make sure that your bugs are not on the following list of known issues. You can use your browser's word finder to help search the list.

  • If the bug is not on the list then please post it in this thread. Attach to your message a screenshot (if possible) and a log file (it's called the "se.log" and is located in the system folder of SpaceEngine's directory). Only the log file will help me to understand your problem and find a solution.


    Known Issues



    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Monday, 30.09.2013, 22:45
    •  
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 06:41 | Message # 181
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8717
    Status: Offline
    		smjjames, RPB is irrelevant to what he was saying. And you should always have it turned off except in specific circumstances.

    As for Sedna, go into the KuiperBelt.sc catalog and comment out its AbsMagn parameter. Then change its Albedo to 0.32. That should fix the magnitude problem. For some reason the AbsMagn was causing an issue. Also, change Radius to 500, add RotationPeriod and set to 10, and add Mass and set to 1.675e-4. That should provide more realistic parameters for Sedna than exist by default.



    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM

    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 07:21
     
    smjjamesDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 06:57 | Message # 182
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    		Oh, sounded like he was talking about RPB, but wasn't sure if it affected magnitude or anything, and I do keep RPB off.



     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 07:00 | Message # 183
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8717
    Status: Offline
    Quote (smjjames)
    sounded like he was talking about RPB

    He made no mention of it, he was talking about magnitude, and he even gave numbers. None of what he posted suggested he was talking about real planet brightness. What made you think that?



    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
     
    Fireinthehole-Date: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 08:24 | Message # 184
    Pioneer
    Group: Translators
    Sweden
    Messages: 365
    Status: Offline
    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    smjjames, RPB is irrelevant to what he was saying. And you should always have it turned off except in specific circumstances.

    As for Sedna, go into the KuiperBelt.sc catalog and comment out its AbsMagn parameter. Then change its Albedo to 0.32. That should fix the magnitude problem. For some reason the AbsMagn was causing an issue. Also, change Radius to 500, add RotationPeriod and set to 10, and add Mass and set to 1.675e-4. That should provide more realistic parameters for Sedna than exist by default.

    I changed that but still the magnitude shows an incorrect number. unsure

    smjjames, I think real planet brightness is more realistic, I use it all the time but it shound't affect the magnitude number. wink



    Love Space Engine!
     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:05 | Message # 185
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8717
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    I think real planet brightness is more realistic

    It is not more realistic, it is less realistic. The fact that everyone thinks that it's somehow "more realistic" and don't understand its intended use is why it is my least favorite feature of SE.

    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    I changed that but still the magnitude shows an incorrect number

    So your Sedna parameters look like this now?

    Code
        ParentBody "Sol"
      AsterType  "Centaur"
      Radius      500
      Albedo      0.32
      Color     ( 0.750 0.450 0.350 )
      // AbsMagn     1.5
      SlopeParam  0.15
      RotationPeriod 10
      Mass  1.675e-4


    Because when I made those changes the magnitude behaves properly.



    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
     
    WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:15 | Message # 186
    Galaxy Architect
    Group: Global Moderators
    United States
    Messages: 2613
    Status: Offline
    		I notice that the apparent magnitude display for Sedna is independent of phase angle, unlike every body I looked at, including other dwarf planets like Eris. This is probably related to the problem at hand.

    Edit: Oh, I see what's going on. Sedna is classified as an asteroid, and for some reason all asteroids in SE have strange behavior regarding how the apparent magnitude is calculated with respect to phase angle. There is a dependency, but it's very small, and unlike planets / dwarf planets, the magnitude does not go to infinity when viewing the dark side. I'm not sure if that's relevant to what's going on with what smjjames is pointing out though.



     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:29 | Message # 187
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8717
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Watsisname)
    This is probably related to the problem at hand.

    This is seemingly caused by the AbsMagn parameter, since the apparent magnitude behaved normally after disabling it. Other objects with similar catalog entries have similar behavior. I'll make a thread with corrections at some point I think.

    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    edna is classified as an asteroid, and for some reason all asteroids in SE have strange behavior regarding how the apparent magnitude is calculated with respect to phase angle.

    No, it's not the class, it's the AbsMagn parameter.



    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM

    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:31
     
    WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 09:32 | Message # 188
    Galaxy Architect
    Group: Global Moderators
    United States
    Messages: 2613
    Status: Offline
    		Ah, okay, thanks for clearing that for me.



     
    Fireinthehole-Date: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 16:17 | Message # 189
    Pioneer
    Group: Translators
    Sweden
    Messages: 365
    Status: Offline
    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    It is not more realistic, it is less realistic. The fact that everyone thinks that it's somehow "more realistic" and don't understand its intended use is why it is my least favorite feature of SE.

    Why is it less realistic? unsure

    And yes, now it works, thank you wink



    Love Space Engine!
     
    smjjamesDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 16:51 | Message # 190
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    Quote (HarbingerDawn)
    It is not more realistic, it is less realistic. The fact that everyone thinks that it's somehow "more realistic" and don't understand its intended use is why it is my least favorite feature of SE.

    Why is it less realistic? unsure


    I summarized it in that it tends to make things either too dark or too bright than they should be, it also makes distant objects too dark to even see much of anything with RPB on.

    Found the whole discussion about it, starting near the bottom of page 5 of this thread. It got derailed though when Space Engineer started talking about nebulae, not that I'm complaining or anything.



     
    WatsisnameDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 17:11 | Message # 191
    Galaxy Architect
    Group: Global Moderators
    United States
    Messages: 2613
    Status: Offline
    		One has to be clear about what Real Planet Brightness is doing. It correctly (I guess?) shows how different worlds would look to a camera at a fixed exposure setting, but it absolutely does not show how they would look to the human eye. The reason for that is because the human eye adapts very quickly to new lighting conditions and over a very wide range of light intensities.

    The only time Real Planet Brightness does a good job of showing how the eye sees things is when you're looking at two objects at very different different distances from the sun at the same time. E.g. if you look at the Moon and Saturn together from the Earth, you'll notice that Saturn has a much lower surface brightness.



     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 17:13 | Message # 192
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8717
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Fireinthehole)
    Why is it less realistic?

    Read my posts starting here and continuing until the discussion ends on some later page.

    Quote (Watsisname)
    The only time Real Planet Brightness does a good job of showing how the eye sees things is when you're looking at two objects at very different different distances from the sun at the same time

    Correct. Anyway the RPB feature will become useless once a proper autoexposure feature is implemented (I doubt we'll see this in 0.98, but maybe in 0.99).



    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM

    Edited by HarbingerDawn - Tuesday, 11.06.2013, 17:30
     
    smjjamesDate: Thursday, 13.06.2013, 21:13 | Message # 193
    World Builder
    Group: Users
    United States
    Messages: 913
    Status: Offline
    		While this is a minor bug that existed in 0.96, I'm just reporting it as still existing.

    Sometimes when landing on a planet, it will 'land' you a few kilometers above the surface rather than about 10m from the surface. You can still move around as normal though. Seems like craters are a culprit, although in this case, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a basin or an eroded crater.

    Note: Pause time before going to the location.
    Place "Planet Cold desert"
    {
    Body "RS 0-6-116981-742-822-3-180-13 5"
    Parent "RS 0-6-116981-742-822-3-180-13"
    Pos (-2.693140252908038e-011, 2.335627188616157e-012, 1.845262852023452e-010)
    Rot (-0.7384344014139745, 0.05331078147615614, 0.0493805384479391, -0.670398506717742)
    Date "2013.06.13 22:45:04.28"
    Vel 3.2407764e-011
    Mode 2
    }



     
    Crashman1390Date: Friday, 14.06.2013, 02:51 | Message # 194
    Explorer
    Group: Users
    Canada
    Messages: 229
    Status: Offline
    		The elusive glitch of Jupiter from the Galileo probe.

    Attachments: 6099823.jpg (112.7 Kb) · 0513541.log (71.5 Kb)




    [b]I was wrong, this forum still has a horrible community.[/b]
     
    HarbingerDawnDate: Friday, 14.06.2013, 08:58 | Message # 195
    Cosmic Curator
    Group: Administrators
    United States
    Messages: 8717
    Status: Offline
    Quote (Crashman1390)
    The elusive glitch of Jupiter from the Galileo probe.

    This is caused by overlapping cloud layers.



    All forum users, please read this!
    My SE mods and addons
    Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2 GHz, 16 GB DDR3 RAM, GTX 970 3584 MB VRAM
     
    Forum » SpaceEngine » Archive » Known issues and bug reports - SpaceEngine 0.97 (Please post here any bugs you find in SpaceEngine)
    Search:

    Copyright Vladimir Romanyuk © 2011-2026
    Create a free website with uCoz