That would be insane, also I would like to see Uranus and Neptune'sWanna see J1407b
That would be insane, also I would like to see Uranus and Neptune'sWanna see J1407b
You lol, they are already there.also I would like to see Uranus and Neptune's
I meant their rings xDYou lol, they are already there.also I would like to see Uranus and Neptune's
Once again I tell ya "U LOL". Because:I meant their rings xDYou lol, they are already there.also I would like to see Uranus and Neptune's
I DIDN't SAW THEM SORRY LOL they look beautiful ♥Once again I tell ya "U LOL". Because:I meant their rings xDYou lol, they are already there.
http://forum.spaceengine.org/viewtopic. ... 135#p35942
This is a dream come true! I wonder if it would be possible to ring "jump" from rock/particle to rock/particle? That sounds like a fun game within the game! I cant wait to see what the highly complex rings of Saturn look like with the shepherding moons and ringlets crossing each other and all that.I remember seeing the photographs from Cassini and this looks even better than that especially since it is immersive!
Ah got it. So doubling up on FP32s and not native FP64.Rings shader doesn't uses doubles, it uses emulation through two floats.
Still a lot faster than native FP64 since that is 1:64 rate on nvidia and a still slow 1:16 rate on AMD.Yes, performance is almost halved by using emulated FP64.
No, thin rings are the problem, because then you have to make the particles smaller, which causes the aforementioned precision issues and requires fading out the particle rendering at a closer distance to avoid a massive performance hit (since there are way more particles).Sounds like another good reason to keep the rings as thin as possible (10-20m rather than 100s-1000s of m)