better 2D map export (looks like I found a bug too!)

edited January 2012 in AstroSynthesis General
The 2d map export is a potentially useful function, but I am facing two obstacles that I think could be relatively easily fixed in a future update:

1) The available Orientations are limited. On the near star dataset that I am using at the moment, if I use the X/Z orientation for the 2D map the view is the opposite of what I want it to be because the camera is on the wrong side of the plane (it seems to be looking "up" from -Y towards the origin - I need it to be looking "down" from +Y to the origin). Can we get options for the opposite view of the three orientations provided as well? (i.e. -(X/Y), -(X/Z), and (-Y/Z) views)

2) There's currently no way to completely disable the printing of system labels on the map. Would it be possible to get a checkbox for that please? (this makes it impossible for me to just rotate the map to the orientation that I need it, and then put my own labels on it instead)

I think having those two options available would greatly enhance the usability of the 2D map option!


  • Actually, I think the rotated orientation might actually be a bug. The manual states:
    If you are looking from the top of the map (down along the y axis), you'll want to select X/Z.
    That's not what I'm seeing when I create the 2D map though.

    This is a Sector view of Sol from "above", looking down to the origin (Sol) along the +y axis, above the galactic plane (looking down from Galactic Latitude 90°). The Galactic core (Galactic Longitude 0°) is directly towards the top of the image, Spinward (Galactic Longitude 90°) is directly towards the left of the image. I know the stars are shown in the correct locations relative to those axes because I've doublechecked the data (it's from the RECONS near star list) and verified it with Celestia too:

    (if you want Astrosynthesis axes, +X is to the right towards Ross 128, +Z is to the bottom towards Tau Ceti, and we're looking down through the origin (Sol) from +Y to -Y).

    This is what I get when I do a 2D map export of the same file though:

    Note that Tau Ceti is towards the bottom of the image in the Sector view, but it's flipped around to the top of the screen in the map. You can also see that Gliese 1005 and Ross 128 are on the same sides of Sol as in the Sector View, so it's definitely not as if we're looking at the X/Z plane from the -Y direction. I wondered if I was looking at the 2D map from "below" (from Galactic Longitude -90°) but that can't be right because Beta Comae Berenices is shown here with a Z location of +29 (which is correct - it's near the Galactic North pole).

    I guess it's possible that the heights would still be shown as positive even if you're looking from the -Y axis, but that'd be a really confusing way to show them - and if I'm supposed to be viewing the X/Z plane from the +y direction in the 2D map then it should have the same orientation as the Sector display (which it doesn't).

    Here's the code I'm using for some of the stars (they were imported via CSV as described on p102/103 of the manual):
    Star,0,Sol,0,0,0,1,,,G2 V,,
    Star,1,Alpha Centauri A,3.046481102,-0.051770093,-3.125577173,1.14,,,G2 V,,
    Star,2,Barnard's Star,-2.987906136,1.452806288,-4.971007204,0.16,,,M3.5 V,,
    Star,11,Ross 128,5.542711153,9.431894005,-0.014240086,0.16,,,M4 V,,
    Star,19,Tau Ceti,-0.407601249,-11.41126567,3.368669849,0.92,,,G8.5 V,,
    Star,74,Gliese 1005 A,-4.595080384,-18.81496262,-0.489561483,0.18,,,M3.5 V,,
    Star,10027,Beta Comae Berenices,-1.64510301,29.74944959,-1.733,1.05,1.04,1.29,G0 V,,

    I think the 2D map isn't being rendered properly and has been flipped somehow - the stars that should be shown above Sol in the 2D map are actually shown below it, and vice versa.

    If I'm right, this should be investigated (and fixed)! Can anyone else verify this?
  • So... is this a bug? If so, will it be fixed in the next update?
  • I havent taken a look at it yet, but if its confirmed I'll add it to the list of things to fix in the next release.

    Its best to send bug reports to the support email address, rather than posting them here, if you need a reply. Please see the announcement at the top of the forum.
  • Sorry - email sent!

Leave a Comment