Is that “Modding Marketplace” that @INovaeKeith proposed some time ago still planned?
Yes it is still planned.
3 Likes
The clouds look nice already, I’m really hoping now that the kick starter gets funded enough for volumetric clouds to be included!
2 Likes
what I like about the last screenshot is that you can see the different star types (red, yellow/white, blue)
1 Like
It’s that time again… time to post a few screenshots.
After asking which screenshot I should share in this mornings dev call, I was told… “share all of them, and explain.”
Here you go!
Star Colour is different in the three shots, red, blue, and white. I also diminished the atmosphere thickness, and adjusted the atmospheric scattering settings to tweak the look of each shot.
Enjoy.
“Mountain Range, variable stars” (Red Star)
“Mountain Range, variable stars” (Yellow / White)
“Mountain Range, variable stars” (White / Blue)
11 Likes
Stars are often represented with much more pronounced colours. Here, they are looking much closer to white, I wonder why?
Is there because of atmospheric scattering? If it scatters enough blue light, it would dampen the blue colour of the last star.
I vaguely remember Kichae explaining that red stars would be redder than their temperature would suggest because cooler stars would have more dust in their atmosphere. Maybe this is a bigger star that doesn’t have much dust in its atmosphere?
But then if such stars would appear yellow, why do we call them red stars?
Oh, and btw:
Thanks for the beautiful screenshots!
Yes Indeed! I’m loving the screenshots as well 
[quote=“ThornEel, post:46, topic:582”]
Stars are often represented with much more pronounced colours. Here, they are looking much closer to white, I wonder why?[/quote]
Excellent question! That can fairly simply be explained as a combination of artistic license and the coconut effect. People generally like colour, so it gets injected into illustrations.
Real stars are much more monotonous in colour because stars are, roughly speaking, black-body radiators. That means they give off a continuous spectrum of light at nearly all wavelengths (though not an equal amount of light at every wavelength, by any stretch of the imagination). Just like an incandescent light bulb, stars emit visible light because they’re hot, and an object that is hot enough to give off an appreciable amount of visible light (>~ 700 C or 1000 K) is giving off light of all colours. If that light is distinctly red to the naked eye, it’s because the object is giving off very little light in the blue-violet end of the visible spectrum, and a lot of light in the red and infrared end of the spectrum.
Astronomers generally characterize the colour of a star by where its peak wavelength falls in the colour spectrum. As mentioned, black-body objects do not give off equal amounts of light at every wavelength. The intensity of light they give off at each wavelength is described by what’s known as the blackbody distribution, AKA the Planck distribution. It resembles a skewed bell curve:
As you can see, at different temperatures the peak of the light distribution curve is at different wavelengths, with hotter objects having their peak further to the left (note that the line colours used here are not representative of star colours). A red-hot object would, again, have a temperature of ~1000 K, and a peak wavelength at ~2.9 μm (way off to the far right of the chart). Its peak height would be so low as to almost not register on that graph.
The coolest possible star, on the other hand, has an effective temperature of ~2000 K, and a peak wavelength of ~1.4 μm at a height ~1/4 that of the 3000 K line in the above chart. That would cause it to give off significant amounts of red, orange, yellow, and maybe even green light, giving it a distinctly yellow-orange colour to the naked eye.
Most “red” stars that we talk about in astronomy have temperatures between 3000 K and 4000 K (stars below 3000 K are “ultra cool” stars), and so fall between the red and green lines. That puts their peaks in or just outside of the red part of the visible spectrum, which is why they’re called red stars. Note that this is the same spread of temperatures that are labelled “soft” or “warm” on light-bulbs. These stars give off light that would look very much like your typical household lamp.
Remember that scattering acts to redden a light source. That yellow disk would actually appear more whitish if viewed from above the atmosphere. And yes, the blue star would appear more blue, but blue stars (with temperatures > 10,000 K) have their peak at wavelengths of < 0.3 μm and would reach their maximum values well off the top of that chart. It would give off so much of each colour of visible light that, to the human eye, they would be effectively white, with a bit of a hint of blue (with the blue becoming more noticeable at greater distances).
The reddening caused by dust in the atmosphere wouldn’t be enough to actually drown out all of the light from the blue end of the spectrum (also, larger red stars (red giants and supergiants) tend to have more dust than red dwarf stars do, due to heavier atoms generated in their cores over their lifetime being dredged up by deep convection during their expansion process), so while they would appear redder, they wouldn’t appear to be red.
Because astronomers measure colour differently from the average person. Red stars have their peak brightness in red astronomical filters.
9 Likes
You don’t often see oblong lenses like that. That’s pretty neat!
See? See? They’ve been hiding stuff from us!
2 Likes
We’ve been hiding a lot from you lol.
12 Likes
So cruel:( I like the ramp up in updates though!
1 Like
Lol. I don’t get why you guys are getting excited about lens flare?
JJ Abrams would be proud!
8 Likes
It’s not about the lens flare. It’s about how pretty the whole thing looks together 
1 Like
Some of us are nostalgic for the days before our lasik surgery…?
1 Like
… Darn chromatic abbreviation will drive me to it … some when some when.
Great shots. I knew that coloured stars where the “thing” you mentioned
Thank you very much for the explanation, Kichae, that was great.
Those lens flare effect look great (and I usually don’t care much for lens flare); I wonder what kind of set-up would physically create such effect?