Replies: 1 comment 3 replies
-
That light pollution kills ZL was implemented with an educative intention. We can discuss fine-tuning (therefore the issue is not closed!), but it would be horrific nonsense to allow any setting that would show ZL in the middle of a bright city with Bortle index>7 without switching off the atmosphere. To visualize latitude dependence, you can exagerrate ZL brightness beyond the brightness I find roughly realistic. I would have to observe it again for further finetuning, but Atque may suggest better values earlier. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
As a general note, sometimes the arguments pops up that Stellarium wants to be "realistic", and some wishes are classified as foolish, physically impossible, etc.
One needs to remember that this is software that is capable to highlight phenomena that are not always well visible, but it should not block a priori things that seem "physically impossible". Also, software is capable of producing things that will never be visible in reality, and this can provide insight.
A realistic mode is certainly nice to have, but often we need to amplify things, and sometimes exaggerate on purpose, eg for educational reasons, or simply for artistic reasons (eg think of the - indeed unrealistic - 300x telescope (#1178), the limits on FOV values (#1196), invisible comets, etc).
It is not because something is physically impossible, that Stellarium should systematically enforce that limit. As long as we steer away from e.g. "division by zero" situations, software should allow to see things that might not be evident in reality. Of course, Stellarium is not the most accurate application, but attempts to mask such imperfections should receive a lot of attention.
Because if one really wants to have Stellarium enforce physical limits, one should - just as an example, but many more could be given - not allow the user to look below the horizon: that's just one simple example of how Stellarium allows more than is physically possible (e.g. if Stellarium would stick to "realistic" mode, it should force the user to change location in order to see what's happening below the horizon). Another example are the nice images one can make appear under the DSS/TOAST/HIPS buttons: these are totally unrealistic for most telescope users without image processing - that's another example of how Stellarium distorts reality for the sake of insight.
So in the issue of #1489 , allow for slack. Sometimes, for educational purposes, there is a need to exaggerate the ZL visual, and an educator will draw the attention that in reality ZL is much weaker. For example, exaggerating can help in better visualise how time and latitude can have impact on the orientation of ZL.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions