It is currently Wed, 23-10-19, 13:09 GMT

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri, 18-01-08, 20:09 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
These are the definitions I'm assuming.
Watermask = looks similar to original bmng watermask. But it has the latest output from the new gdal run. Cubic spline reduction.
Landmask = a spec map. Same output from gdal only inverted.

What I thought you wanted me to upload here is an upgrade of the file I have here already. The Watermask. One that will work with the specmap tool. This is the first output from latest gdal run plus some corrections.

If this is the case, the specmap tool will need to invert the file like it already does and have the option for adding residual light per the users choice. But it doesn't need to upgrade the coastlines. The coastlines north of 60 degrees come from the srtm map. But there isn't any inland water. Since the original bmng watermask has this inland water, even if it is poor quality, some users may still want the option to add it. But this should only be done north or south of 60 degrees.

The file I updated at my site is a spec map. Ready to go. Residual light too. The value that you recommended using with specmap tool instruction here at the forum. http://forum.celestialmatters.org/viewt ... =1118#1118
If you want a spec map without residual light on land, I can invert the one I was planning to upload. Then you'lll have a raw Landmask without residual light plus the corrections I made.

About Antarctica, yes it should be the same as yours. I probably used the same file.

cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri, 18-01-08, 22:34 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
Fridger,
I'm still a little confused too. Given what I wrote in my last post, which file do you want? The watermask is ready to upload. I'll have to invert it if you want the Landmask without residual light on land.
cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 19-01-08, 20:12 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
cartrite wrote:
I found an error with the specmap. Here is a context shot. Australia is to the left.
Image

Closeups

Image

No specmap basic render path.

Image

Specmap.

Image

First one I found. Hope there isn't many others. This showed up with both versions of the specmap. I found it while I was checking into the new cloud shadow code Chris is working on. Go figure. :?

cartrite


Remember this post? These double islands were due to a difference between swbd and the 84k srtm. They had the same island in slightly different places. This screen shot something a little different. There are shadows being drawn out in the ocean. Here is a context shot. Notice the island second from the left out in the ocean.

Image
That second island from the left zoomed in. There is a difference between the bmng data and the srtm data. I'm not sure how widespread this is?

Image

cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 19-01-08, 22:29 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Tsunami? ;-)

F.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 11:40 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
cartrite,

at last I found the time to compare your latest improved watermap (swbd-watermask-ver2) with the official BMNG watermap above 60 degrees north:

Unfortunately, before publishing your new watermap, it seems we must do something about the abrupt lack of water structure in the northern regime, where the improved data have stopped. Here is an illustration:

Your swbd-watermask-ver2 Image


while here is about the same view with the official BMNG watermap

Image

I can easily incorporate the old BMNG data into your map above 60 degrees.

Cheers,
F.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 11:59 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
cartrite
Do you mean add it with specmap tool or add it to the Watermask file? I looked at adding the original data above 60 north but decided against it because the original data is so poor. I am still thinking about a solution to this but haven't come up with anything yet.

Doesn't the watermask at CM now have the same result? No water data above 60 north? The resulting specmap also missing data above 60 north?
cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 12:21 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
cartrite,

the official BMNG watermap to which I have linked originally, does have continuous water data coverage above 60 degrees. Of course, the quality is far from perfect. There are different possible ways by which logical operations to merge the old data in for the polar regimes.

F.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 12:26 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
cartrite,

I think the additions above 60N should be part of your replacement watermask, rather than being merged in each time with specmap. Since your map is a custom map anyway, it doesn't matter from the point of view of "data purity" if the BMNG watermap data are also used in part.

Perhaps we can use suitable filters (hipass, lowpass) from ISIS3 to deal smoothly with the overlap regions.

F.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 13:09 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
t00fri wrote:
I think the additions above 60N should be part of your replacement watermask, rather than being merged in each time with specmap. Since your map is a custom map anyway, it doesn't matter from the point of view of "data purity" if the BMNG watermap data are also used in part.

See Here.
http://forum.celestialmatters.org/viewt ... =2763#2763
Is this what you are suggesting? I'd rather not waste my time. If you want to then have at it.
cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 13:20 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
I am aware of course that the issue is not an easy one due to various matching problems. But in any case we cannot just have rivers end in "Nirvana" or big lakes missing. So I think this needs some additional creative ideas and the task is far from a vast of time ;-)

F.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat, 26-01-08, 13:38 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
t00fri wrote:
I am aware of course that the issue is not an easy one due to various matching problems. But in any case we cannot just have rivers end in "Nirvana" or big lakes missing. So I think this needs some additional creative ideas and the task is far from a vast of time ;-)

F.

I don't think adding data above 60 north is a waste of time. I just think using the original bmng watermask data to accomplish this is a waste of time. I'm looking into ways of doing this but haven't decided the best way yet. I leaning towards extracting bands 3-6-7 from MODIS. These are hdf files and I haven't got the hdf format figured out yet.
http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/faq/ What do the different band combinations mean?
Anyhow, if and when I do figure this out, I was planning on updating the watermask file with the new data. Until then, If you want to add the original bmng watermask data to the existing map, then I don't have a problem with it. But I don't want to do it and upload another file. The way I think, if users want this data included, I think the best way would be to add it in with specmap tool. Personally, I will not add it to the specmap I use.
cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun, 27-01-08, 0:57 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
cartrite,

I quickly hacked my original specmap to fill the /white/ polar areas above 60 degrees north of your swbd-watermap-ver2 with the data from the BMNG-watermap. This looks quite good:

Reminder: your swbd-watermap-ver2 around 60 degrees where rivers end in Nirvana and big lakes are missing...

Image

Now -- for exactly the same region-- compare my modification that does leave your map below 60 degs untouched, as well as any black areas also above 60 degs. It just fills the white ones with black rivers and lakes. Look how it connects well to that river ending in Nirvana...

Image

Here is the hacked specmap.cpp code, now called watermap.cpp

http://www.shatters.net/~t00fri/images/watermap.cpp.gz

You compile it like so under Linux
Code:
g++ -O3 -Wall -o watermap watermap.cpp

In order to make an improved watermap (without restlight and without inversion), do this:

Code:
> gzip -dc < swbd-watermask-ver2.1x86400x43200.bin.gz| watermap 86400 world.watermask.86400x43200.bin > swbd-watermask-ver2-t00fri.1x86400x43200.bin


F.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun, 27-01-08, 2:42 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
Your screen shot looks pretty good. I guess a lot of users will say it's better than having nothing there.

I did use the watermap tool and took a look. There were some areas that looked alright. There were some areas that didn't look alright. The real test will be if it compliments the bmng texture. I never really checked these areas. I was convinced that I didn't want to use the original bmng watermask when I took a look at South America.

cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun, 27-01-08, 10:15 GMT 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Fri, 31-08-07, 7:01 GMT
Posts: 4652
Location: Hamburg, Germany
cartrite wrote:
Your screen shot looks pretty good. I guess a lot of users will say it's better than having nothing there.

I did use the watermap tool and took a look. There were some areas that looked alright. There were some areas that didn't look alright.


I had a look where your watermap didn't look alright, namely beyond 60 degrees north. What is relevant is not so much how the specular map itself looks, but rather how this is seen within celestia. Here is a screenshot of southern Norway with your map (without my BMNG additions). I think the sudden ending of all rivers along the 60th degree in latitude looks pretty weired.
Image

Or here, corresponding to the spec images above:

Image
Quote:
The real test will be if it compliments the bmng texture. I never really checked these areas. I was convinced that I didn't want to use the original bmng watermask when I took a look at South America.


Note that via my code the BMNG-watermap is ONLY used above 60 degs NORTH (not south!). Moreover the sun and hence specularity occurs much less naturally in these high latitudes.

F.


Last edited by t00fri on Sun, 27-01-08, 17:00 GMT, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun, 27-01-08, 10:34 GMT 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu, 25-10-07, 15:20 GMT
Posts: 992
Location: NE PA, USA
I knew all about what your showing. But what does the original bmng watermask look like in those areas. I never even looked at that. The original bmng watermask stopped being used on my system when I looked at South America. I mean are some of these lakes in the middle of a forest or town or are they where they are supposed to be? Do the rivers stay within their banks or do the rivers carve out new channels?
When I looked at the watermask created with the original bmng data, here are a few areas I didn't like.

Image

Image

Image

cartrite


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 148 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group