 | | Re: Easy starfield, planet and star recipe
|
|
(...) Actually my "more accurate rendering" was done with pencil and paper. I suppose I could scan it. As for astronomical accuracy, I just thought somewhere in the back of my mind that the lit spot on the planet was somehow different from the way (...) (23 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: Easy starfield, planet and star recipe
|
|
Actually Dan, I've been taking the Jassim Starfield (and Galaxy) tutorial and have been more than pleased with the resulting galactic backdrops. It's saved me scouring the 'Net and stealing other people's images. Thanks kindly, Teach! Cheers, -G (...) (23 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: Easy starfield, planet and star recipe
|
|
(...) Thank you for your suggestions. I was trying to keep this recipe as basic as possible--sort of an intro for those who haven't tried this. Thus, that particular picture was not an exercise in astronomical accuracy but more for simply using the (...) (23 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Re: Easy starfield, planet and star recipe
|
|
In lugnet.space, Daniel Jassim writes: ... (...) . . . (...) looks wrong. The lit spot is too small, unless the star is tiny, and practically on top of the planet. Perhaps you need to drag the gradient circle just a bit further if you start at the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Easy starfield, planet and star recipe
|
|
Greetings! Here's a simple starfield recipe for Photoshop: - Make a new document, 720 X 480 pixels, 300 dpi, Mode: Grayscale - Go to your Tool Palette and grab your Paint Bucket tool and fill the canvas with black - Go to Filter, then Texture, then (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.space, lugnet.publish.photography)
|
| |
| | Thunderbots! Champion of RoboRescue!
|
|
Hi all, Recently at the Robocup Junior Finals, Thunderbots took first place in that competition. To find out more Click this link (URL) Au (23 years ago, 19-Sep-02, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Unviewable page, useless warning (Was: UCS TIE Crawler)
|
|
Bill, It's clear that you've made up your mind, as have I. Ok, no biggie, but I can see that our debate is starting to go in circles now. I'm not turning on javascript for the simple reason that I don't need it -- the vast majority of the sites I (...) (23 years ago, 17-Sep-02, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Unviewable page, useless warning (Was: UCS TIE Crawler)
|
|
(...) I checked stats on my site (just my stuff, since the site actually has some more techhie content elsewhere)-- about 86% of the last 500K+ hits were MSIE, 12% Netscape/Mozilla. Most of the rest were bots, or things like Scooter, Opera, etc. If (...) (23 years ago, 17-Sep-02, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: Unviewable page, useless warning (Was: UCS TIE Crawler)
|
|
(...) It hasn't been a risk for a long time. Some early browsers had Javascript security risks, but they were fixed years ago. It's nothing like the ActiveX risks in MSIE - but luckily few sites use ActiveX, so that's safe to turn off (if you must (...) (23 years ago, 17-Sep-02, to lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: 1000steine.de question
|
|
(...) I would also like to know what happened to this feature... Jeff J (23 years ago, 17-Sep-02, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.general)
|
