Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Development
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Addon Development Developers post news, updates, & discussions here about your projects in development.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-23-2016, 07:07 PM   #61
fort
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NukeET View Post
 Thanks for posting this fort.

I thought I was losing my mind when the documentation and treeman were giving two different latitude index results for the converted file, old surface tile to new.
Hello,

I think that those formulas are right but I was hoping that Face will confirm it by regards to it's own formulas for treeman but... All experiences i made seems to confirm that i'm right but sometimes...

I was hoping also that Martin will take look someday to this topic and says something about that difference between it's pdf and what one experiment here but...

good day NukeET and thank you for your addons.

Last edited by fort; 10-23-2016 at 07:12 PM.
fort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 07:25 PM   #62
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NukeET View Post
 Thanks for posting this fort.

I thought I was losing my mind when the documentation and treeman were giving two different latitude index results for the converted file, old surface tile to new.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 Hello,

I think that those formulas are right but I was hoping that Face will confirm it by regards to it's own formulas for treeman but... All experiences i made seems to confirm that i'm right but sometimes...

I was hoping also that Martin will take look someday to this topic and says something about that difference between it's pdf and what one experiment here but...

good day NukeET and thank you for your addons.
I must admit that I simply did not understand fort's text. What is wrong now? treeman's output, or martins formula?

If the former: I've tried it with several bases, and the results were right IMHO. If the later: I started with martins formula, but of course I never expected my code to work perfectly at first, so I've tweaked it until it worked correctly (in my eyes) for the bases I've tried.

If you folks think that there is something wrong with martins documentation, please report it to him. If you think treeman is producing wrong output, please give me an example where it does so, and what the correct result should be, so I can look into where it goes wrong.

Here is the code I use to convert old-style tiles to new-style tiles NOW:
Code:
float bands=pow((float)2,level+7);
level+=12;
lat=(int)bands-1-lat;
lon=(int)bands*2+lon;
This is what I started with (in my naive 1:1 conversion to code from documentation), but what is apparently wrong:
Code:
float bands=pow((float)2,level+7);
level+=12;
lat=(int)bands-(lat<0?0:1)-lat;
lon=(int)bands*2+(lon<0?0:1)+lon;
Fort, did you talk to martins about that already?
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 07:50 PM   #63
fort
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 ...so I've tweaked it until it worked correctly (in my eyes) for the bases I've tried
For my part I have not tweaked my trys. I tried to understand at new ( a made it a lot of time in the past ), from the Pablo Luna exe, how the tile structure works compared to the 2016 one but, short on my english, it will be really difficult for me to give a comprehensive explanation here.

I think that the formulas i posted are right but i was hoping that someone, maybe you, could confirm it, or not, without, for me, to make others experiments that takes always a lot of time.

I remember some test i made with the last release for treeman and it seems to me that everything was right compared to my research.

I don't know, who, will have, and where, and how - and, as you see, i'm not the champion of the english language here - to contact Dr Schweiger about that, and i'm not sure that he have time for.

I've done what i was maybe able to do. After that...

good day Face.

Last edited by fort; 10-23-2016 at 08:06 PM.
fort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 08:13 PM   #64
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 I think that the formulas i posted are right but i was hoping that someone, maybe you, could confirm it, or not, without, for me, to make others experiments that takes always a lot of time.

I remember some test made with the last release for treeman and it seems to me that everything was right compared to my modest research.

I don't know, who, will have, and where, and how - and, as you see, i'm not the champion of the english language here - to contact Dr Schweiger about that, and i'm not sure that he have time for that.

I've done what i was able to do. After that...

good day.
So if I get that right you want me to tell martins that there might be something wrong with his documentation? Well, I can do that, but I can't really explain it. I can just show him my code and ask him to rethink the documentation based on it.

However, I can't explain it based on your post, because I don't understand it myself. NukeET, you apparently understand it, could you do that, please?

Perhaps I don't see the difference, because I work on the configuration file entries and not on the file names?

---------- Post added at 22:13 ---------- Previous post was at 21:58 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 For my part I have not tweaked my trys. I tried to understand at new ( a made it a lot of time in the past ), from the Pablo Luna exe, how the tile structure works compared to the 2016 one but, short on my english, it will be really difficult for me to give a comprehensive explanation here.
Well, coding is different from just doing it by hand. I often had situations where readily available formulas were hard to translate to code, so I am not that surprised if my first approaches are wrong. In addition, the formula in martins documentation talks about file-names (E/W and N/S prefixes), not the entries in the configuration file (simple integer values). Perhaps that's different, too?

However, if treeman presents correct results, but your manual procedures following martins formula is off-by-one, there might be at least some misunderstanding of the documentation.

Last edited by Face; 10-24-2016 at 06:12 AM. Reason: were instead of where
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 08:28 PM   #65
fort
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 misunderstanding
...misunderstanding or errors, i don't know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
  So if I get that right you want me to tell martins that there might be something wrong with his documentation ?
Is it necessary ? : treeman works and my approach works in concert with your program. Not sure that there will be a lot of people to try by themselves the little equation of the pdf. But treeman certainly more often.

Nevertheless, in spite of my problem with english language i'll try to show here the demonstration - not sure that someone will be interested but...- point by point, starting from the 2010 arborescence to the 2016 one, to explain how i finished with my own formulas and how they match - and i think quite correctly in terms of coordinates - the result given by the last release of treeman, and Orbiter references themselves.

In the meantime - because it can takes time for that: pictures, right translations from french to english, and i don't use a translator... - if, in the meantime, luck could bring Dr Schweiger around...

I will start from the Pablo Luna exe - and it's imperfections -and from a basic grid, with eight, ten, twelve...some tiles, paired number. But back to work tomorrow...so maybe tuesday and most certainly wenesday or later or never.

My mind is far from all the reflexion i've made to obtain the resulting formulas - and it was not a pleasure party - but it should be ok nevertheless. At the end all the "logical" of that is clear.

Last edited by fort; 10-23-2016 at 09:29 PM.
fort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 08:32 PM   #66
NukeET
Gen 1:1
 
NukeET's Avatar

Default

I think fort is right.

The following is empirically determined:

If I convert old surface tile, Moon_3_e1674_s0397.dds:

using Martin's documentation, I get >>surf\15\001421\003723.dds

using treeman, I get >>surf\15\001420\003723.dds

using fort's rules, I get >>surf\15\001420\003722.dds

What actually works in my case is fort's version.

EDIT

I tried a newer(?) version of treeman, found here: http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthr...4&postcount=33

What I then got as output was >>surf\15\001420\003722. i.e., what works in my case.

Last edited by NukeET; 10-23-2016 at 09:24 PM. Reason: Because
NukeET is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 09:00 PM   #67
fort
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NukeET View Post
 I think fort is right.

The following is empirically determined:

If I convert old surface tile, Moon_3_e1674_s0397.dds:

using Martin's documentation, I get >>surf\15\001421\003723.dds

using treeman, I get >>surf\15\001420\003723.dds

using fort's rules, I get >>surf\15\001420\003722.dds

What actually works in my case is fort's version.
I dont remember exactly but i think that the problem come from the version you use. I remember obtaining a good result with a treeman version ( maybe the one made in october: OT3's one, page 3 or 4 of that topic ), when the one posted in the entry of the topic could be obsolete.

http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread....4&postcount=33

Last edited by fort; 10-23-2016 at 09:27 PM.
fort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2016, 09:26 PM   #68
NukeET
Gen 1:1
 
NukeET's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 I dont remember exactly but be carefull with the version you use. I remember obtaining a good result with a treeman version ( maybe the one made in october: OT3's one, page 3 or 4 of that topic ).

http://orbiter-forum.com/showthread....4&postcount=33

See the edit on my last post here:

http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthr...1&postcount=66
NukeET is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 10-24-2016, 05:28 AM   #69
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 Is it necessary ? : treeman works and my approach works in concert with your program. Not sure that there will be a lot of people to try by themselves the little equation of the pdf. But treeman certainly more often.
That's the question right there. If treeman works properly according to your understanding (and examples), I can show (and explain) the code to martins. But I don't know whether or not it matches his equations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 In the meantime - because it can takes time for that: pictures, right translations from french to english, and i don't use a translator... - if, in the meantime, luck could bring Dr Schweiger around...
I guess Martin is not visiting this thread frequently, so chances are he never noticed this uncertainty. I'll send him a PM.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 10-24-2016, 07:43 AM   #70
fort
Orbinaut
Default

Hello,

I spent a lot of time to experiment about these "shift by one".

I have no base to convert or create. But grounds in Orbiter interested me for a long time and, in fact, OT3 was, is, another tool than I wanted to know.

If one accept to spend - not you, you have enough to do with treeman - half an hour can be one hour, surftilecalculator paper and pencil in hand, old tilemanager eventually to be complete, starting from previous experiments - the ones I filled pages 2 and 3 of this topic - to try to understand how all this works and inform anomalies identified (starting from the information of the pdf, in confrontation with our own testing), if the equations at the end prove to be simple enough ... they do not match with those of Dr. Schweiger.

I can always be wrong but I think I did all this with rigor, own material, protocols, and NukeET but only NukeET, alas, seems to say that my results could be correct. Many were interested in your device - treeman, OT3 now - there is a month or two, but I no longer see them ...

And when NukeET confronts, our findings, handmade, with those of OT3, latest version, they are identical. Meaning that OT3 does the job as it could be done by hand with our own formulas.

There must be something, somewhere... or we deceive, are wrong, all three. It 's possible.

Is all that important at the point that we should call Dr. Schweiger for that ? I have no idea.

Last edited by fort; 10-24-2016 at 07:52 AM.
fort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 07:59 AM   #71
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 Many were interested in your device - treeman, OT3 now - there is a month or two, but I no longer see them ...
Yeah, that's not the first time this happens. No problem with me, if nobody is interested anymore, I'll just stop working on it.
At the moment, though, it is too early to do this judgement, because of course people are busy exploring and playing the new version. Give them some time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 And when NukeEt confronts, our findings, handmade, with those of OT3, latest version, they are identical. Meaning that OT3 does the job as it could be done by hand with our own formulas.

There must be something, somewhere... or we deceive, are wrong, all three. It 's possible.

Is all that important at the point that we should call Dr. Schweiger for that ? I have no idea.
Well, as I see it there is AT LEAST a misunderstanding - if not even an error - of martins equations, if all of us three needed to adjust their procedures to get proper results. So for this alone it can't hurt to contact him IMHO. This is why I've already sent him a PM with a short description of the matter at hand, some comments on what I think is the problem, and an invitation to join the discussion here. We'll see what happens...
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 08:09 AM   #72
fort
Orbinaut
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 At the moment, though, it is too early to do this judgement,
It's also how i see that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 So for this alone it can't hurt to contact him IMHO.
I would have hesitated to take this initiative. I'm only a light butterfly in Orbiter.

Last edited by fort; 10-24-2016 at 06:47 PM.
fort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 08:15 AM   #73
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fort View Post
 I would have hesitated to take this initiative. I'm a only a light butterfly in Orbiter.
Hey, the good doctor is no crocodile . No need to be shy.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 09:07 AM   #74
4throck
Enthusiast !
 
4throck's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 At the moment, though, it is too early to do this judgement, because of course people are busy exploring and playing the new version. Give them some time.
Of course I'm interested!
But as Face mentioned these things take time.
I also prefer to start working with something that has matured.
So to be honest I'm waiting on a post reading "here's the link to the final version"

In orbiter development nothing is fast or easy.

A personal example:
1) I started modeling an upgraded Gemini VC
2) I need to merge my mesh with the existing one
3) I need to write a program to merge meshes
4) I can do it in Python but it would be nicer for others if its in Javascript (browser based)
5) I must learn more Javascript
6) No new mesh and no converter program
4throck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-24-2016, 09:33 AM   #75
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4throck View Post
 So to be honest I'm waiting on a post reading "here's the link to the final version"
There won't be a final version, just as TeX version numbers approach \pi, but will never reach it. So I'm afraid you will never use it, then.

Last edited by Face; 10-24-2016 at 11:03 AM. Reason: clarified that it is Tex, not LaTeX that does that versioning
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Development


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:56 PM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.