General Question A SVG Earth Map

[Dig Gil]

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate forum section for this thread, Tex or other moderator may change it if that's better (after noticing me).

I once was reading about the Raster Graphics and Vectorial ones, and thought about the way that software like Google Earth needs to refresh whether we zoom in or out, because it uses tiles of Raster photographs.
Hypothetically thinking, to avoid that we could make a super huge definition picture that would range an entire country or so (to don't speak of the range of the planet), but with a resolution high enough to be able to see houses and cars when zoomed in. But that's to complicated and impractical because it would be wanting or computer to load a photograph with almost the size of that country:OMG::thumbsdown:.
But what's with vectorial images:idea:? we make the Monumental resolution picture has the nominal size, but when loading into a program (like Google Earth for example) it would set it in medium resolution as default simplifying what's shown in the map, but increasing the detail has we zoom in until we get to the maximum zoom (or the nominal vectorial images' resolution):speakcool:.

Is this a plausible approach? What do you think?

Whatever the output of this thread, I'll not make such project of image and map's compilation because I have an extremely low experience in the SVG format or Vectorial Graphics, in spite of trying to turn my Company's Logo into SVG.

 

[Artlav]

Vector graphics?
Either you'll get a schematic map, or it will take serious fractal compression to do.

And, i'm not quite sure how it can be better than raster images in terms of level of details change?
Meaning, how do you expect to increase the resolution?
The basic scheme will still be the same, vector or raster, no?

 

[unussapiens]

I believe that what you are talking about is mip mapping, which is where a lower res version of a texture is shown if you are further away. Orbiter already supports mip mapping. You may wish to have a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vector_graphics and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mipmapping to compare mipmapping and vector graphics.

I may have misunderstood what you said, please correct me if I have.

 

[Dig Gil]

Has I said I haven't got a clear notion of vectorial graphics. From unussapiens link, I don't mean MipMaps.
I'll post a better explanation better later.

 

[MeDiCS]

Because vector graphics describes the image based on geometric primitives, like curves, lines, points etc., it doesn't perform very well with data that deviates a lot from those, like, for example, a picture of a flower garden. Actually, it performs very poorly with datasets that have a lot of interference present, being inefficient both in terms of memory and computational time.

Unless you want to loose data (hence detail) while converting from raster to vector, this isn't just inneficient but possibly impractical.

 

[TSPenguin]

Using vector graphics can also be very slow. I imagine it can easily eat up all the advantages you could gain from using it.

What it would be very interesting for, is the rendering of very far away planets (<20 pixels). Maybe one would be able to offer more detail than a smashed up large texture which only results in a blur when rendered so small. I am thinking about features like shore lines or the big red spot.

 

[Rathelm]

That's the whole point of using Mipmaps though Penguin. You just make your furthest mip 1 pixel large and go from there.

 

[TSPenguin]

Indeed you are right, but for a good view at those sizes, you effectively have to have a mipmap for every few pixels increase in render size.
Granted, this might still be better and faster than using vector data, and easier for sure.

 

[Dig Gil]

OK, I see I will not need to explain better because meDICS already got my point. Anyway I'll try to make a version of my company's logo in .svg to see if it gets pretty .

 

[ar81]

You may have bitmaps (raster graphics) or vector graphics.
Bitmaps basically is a collection of pixel data.
Vector graphics are a collection of data on geometrical objects, like bezier curves or poligons.

For example, a line defined as vector graphics would have coordinates for 2 points and line color. It does not matter how much you zoom in or out you never lose definition.

Bitmaps instead are a grid of pixels. The line becomes colored pixels on the bitmap, so if you zoom the bitmap out yuo may have a pixelized graphic.

A letter with vector graphics would be a collection of polygons as in the first example. Second example is a bitmap composed by pixels.

 

[Dig Gil]

I've already knew that, but this is what jumped to my attention:

(...) It does not matter how much you zoom in or out you never lose definition. (...)

 

[unussapiens]

To do that succesfully for a texture for a planet would be impractical, since you would have to draw every little detail. I would, however, consider seeing it is possible to implement vectorised textures for vessels and panels too, as this would be more practical (I'm not sure how practical, but it would be more likely to work than an entire planet).

 

[MeDiCS]

To do that succesfully for a texture for a planet would be impractical, since you would have to draw every little detail. I would, however, consider seeing it is possible to implement vectorised textures for vessels and panels too, as this would be more practical (I'm not sure how practical, but it would be more likely to work than an entire planet).

That's for sure, but it may burden Martin even more :lol:.

 

[martins]

To do that succesfully for a texture for a planet would be impractical, since you would have to draw every little detail. I would, however, consider seeing it is possible to implement vectorised textures for vessels and panels too, as this would be more practical (I'm not sure how practical, but it would be more likely to work than an entire planet).

You can do that already. Simply forget about textures, and use meshes and materials to create the surface detail. It is not a very framerate-friendly approach though ...

 

[Dig Gil]

I was already guessing that...