Ultimate space simulation software

 
User avatar
Watsisname
Science Officer
Science Officer
Posts: 2320
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 02:33
Location: Bellingham, WA

Re: Space Engine light levels are (wildly) inaccurate. Examples and Possible workaround inside:

06 Apr 2023 05:12

The Sun doesn't seem to change according to the inverse square law when going from planet to planet.  4% of Earth's sunlight as Jupiter, 1% at Saturn, 0.25 % at Uranus and so on...just don't see a huge difference between them...Saturn doesn't seem to have 25% of the light that Jupiter does..I hope this can be remedied
Yes, but your vision works that way, too. Our eyes see light intensity on a logarithmic scale, and they are also very good at adjusting to varying light levels. In a solar eclipse for instance, few people notice that things are darker even when half of the Sun is covered.
 
User avatar
Jellyman
Space Tourist
Space Tourist
Posts: 28
Joined: 16 May 2023 13:26

Re: Space Engine light levels are (wildly) inaccurate. Examples and Possible workaround inside:

21 Jun 2023 14:58

Wow, this actually looks like some of the airless procedural worlds/moons in SE!  I guess SE did a pretty good job of indicating its surface brightness?  I wonder how the icy regions on Pluto look-- doesn't Pluto have a lot of ice on it-- even entire mountains made of ice?  I bet those would look absolutely spectacular!  And I wonder what the "heart" region of Pluto looks like from the ground?  And how large would Charon look since Pluto is basically a "double minor planet"? -- I still keep wanting to call it a planet lol.  And how much of a difference would be between day and night Pluto vs the night side of our Moon?

So if the Milky Way isn't visible on Pluto, can we say this is because of ground based light pollution?  In which case the sky should look brighter too because all that ground light is being reflected back up at the sky? So would a day or night on Pluto be more like a night in New York City or some other light polluted city? And how much of a difference would there be between a day on Pluto vs a night there?  Thanks!
It's a planet. And yes, the surface is very icy with a high albedo. It's dark, but not completely black. If you were standing on its surface, you could still see everything around you, it would just be a lot dimmer.
"We, as planetary scientists and astronomers, do not agree with the IAU's definition of a planet, nor will we use it. A better definition is needed."

—Over 300 planetary scientists, Prague 2006
 
pete543
Observer
Observer
Posts: 4
Joined: 17 Mar 2024 19:52

Re: Space Engine light levels are (wildly) inaccurate. Examples and Possible workaround inside:

26 Mar 2024 15:01

NASA has a Pluto time website that shows how dark it is on Pluto at noon.

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/dwarf-planets/pluto/plutotime/

Noon on Pluto is comparable to 15 minutes before the sunrise on Earth. The landscape is therefore quite dark.

I have paid 20EUR for Space Engine and have done test to perhaps help them. Or I am doing something wrong, in which case please correct me. All tests are with the sun at the same angle and placed in the corner of the screen.

Auto mode
:

Moon: Image


Pluto: Image

(As you can see both are as bright as Sahara sand dunes in desert summer noon on Earth)


HDR mode (the non-realistic rendering mode)
:

Moon: Image


Pluto: Image
(Pluto is still way too bright)


Manual mode (our final chance for realism):

Setting a manual light level on the lunar surface comparable to Apollo lunar surface photography and seeing what the surface of Pluto looks like at this same level:

Moon: Image


Pluto: Image

And this is what Saturn looks like facing the sun at that same light level


Saturn: 
Image

Obviously Space Engine is wildy inaccurate.
What can I do to make Space Engine look accurate, apart from guessing what the brightness should be by adjusting it manually myself?

Possible temporary workaround:
Seeing as HDR mode seems to be the most realistic for now, perhaps it is best to set a manual exposure that is comparable to HDR, perhaps a little darker
I'm almost 100% sure its the exposure
 
gold333
Observer
Observer
Topic Author
Posts: 13
Joined: 28 Feb 2023 09:10

Re: Space Engine light levels are (wildly) inaccurate. Examples and Possible workaround inside:

13 May 2024 10:56

Go to Earth. Land in daylight.

Set exposure to manual so that it looks realistic.

Don't change the exposure.

Go to Pluto.

Notice it's pitch black.

Try to land on the daytime surface (while seeing nothing).

Notice the entire landscape is 0,0,0 RGB. I.e. pitch black.

This is not accurate.
 
User avatar
Watsisname
Science Officer
Science Officer
Posts: 2320
Joined: 06 Sep 2016 02:33
Location: Bellingham, WA

Re: Space Engine light levels are (wildly) inaccurate. Examples and Possible workaround inside:

14 May 2025 16:28

Go to Earth. Land in daylight.
Set exposure to manual so that it looks realistic.
Don't change the exposure.
Go to Pluto.
Notice it's pitch black.
Try to land on the daytime surface (while seeing nothing).
Notice the entire landscape is 0,0,0 RGB. I.e. pitch black.

Very late reply here. But yes, this is correct, because a camera set to manual exposure would do the exact same thing, and that's what the manual exposure setting in SE is emulating. Set a DSLR camera to manual, and take a neutrally balanced exposure of a daytime landscape. Then with the same settings, take an exposure in typical bedroom lighting (around 100 lux to be same as Pluto). Your photo will be pitch black.

We found out earlier what your eyes would see, using a bit of math and personal experience with the closest analogue possible here on Earth. It's this moment about 30 seconds before or after the totality of a solar eclipse. The Sun is still blindingly bright and you can't safely look at it (you can't even tell that it's being mostly covered by the Moon -- that doesn't become obvious until the last few seconds.) Similarly, it would be unsafe to look directly at the Sun from Pluto, and it would even be difficult to tell that it's much smaller in the sky than as seen from Earth. Only the sharpness of shadows would clearly give that away. The ground around you will also still be fairly bright -- obviously dimmer than a clear sunny day on Earth, but still bright enough to see very clearly. It's not even into the realm of losing the sensitivity to colors (scotopic vision) yet.

Image
 
User avatar
Salvo
Pioneer
Pioneer
Posts: 467
Joined: 03 Nov 2016 07:19
Location: Veneto, Italy
Contact:

Re: Space Engine light levels are (wildly) inaccurate. Examples and Possible workaround inside:

15 May 2025 01:38

Go to Earth. Land in daylight.
Set exposure to manual so that it looks realistic.
Don't change the exposure.
Go to Pluto.
Notice it's pitch black.
Try to land on the daytime surface (while seeing nothing).
Notice the entire landscape is 0,0,0 RGB. I.e. pitch black.

Very late reply here. But yes, this is correct, because a camera set to manual exposure would do the exact same thing, and that's what the manual exposure setting in SE is emulating. Set a DSLR camera to manual, and take a neutrally balanced exposure of a daytime landscape. Then with the same settings, take an exposure in typical bedroom lighting (around 100 lux to be same as Pluto). Your photo will be pitch black.

We found out earlier what your eyes would see, using a bit of math and personal experience with the closest analogue possible here on Earth. It's this moment about 30 seconds before or after the totality of a solar eclipse. The Sun is still blindingly bright and you can't safely look at it (you can't even tell that it's being mostly covered by the Moon -- that doesn't become obvious until the last few seconds.) Similarly, it would be unsafe to look directly at the Sun from Pluto, and it would even be difficult to tell that it's much smaller in the sky than as seen from Earth. Only the sharpness of shadows would clearly give that away. The ground around you will also still be fairly bright -- obviously dimmer than a clear sunny day on Earth, but still bright enough to see very clearly. It's not even into the realm of losing the sensitivity to colors (scotopic vision) yet.

Image
Yeah, exactly. Because camera work in a completely different way than our eyes. I'm still not sure it would really be so much pitch black but yeah, I think it's quite accurate. What we don't realize is how much bright is the day here... There's reaally a looot of light during the day on earth  :lol:

Also if you took a camera like those of your phone you wouldn't see pitch black because it also has some kind of automatic adjustment. There's one think called Pluto time that is the time in which you see as much light on earth than you see on pluto. I might want to try to do an experiment, to open the smartphone's camera, set everything to automatic, take note of the setting, and then at "Pluto time" try to go to a place without moon or artificial lights (not easy to find unfortunately) and open the camera with the same settings it had during the day.
The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition.

CPU: Intel Core i7 14700KF GPU: NVidia RTX 4070
RAM: 32 GBs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests