Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:54 am
Sorry, the other image was florin, not marak. (I reversed it earlier when I couldn't get it to match up, thinking that the ceiling might be reversed, because it's the ceiling, see, if you put it on the floor, it would be upside down.)
See, I don't think the TCG constellation images have anything to do with it. They're too had to tell what size they're supposed to be, and like I said about every half a dozen configurations I attempt, I'm able to match up two or more stars/gems, perfectly. I think the same mapping program was created to make the ceiling maps and the night sky image, because of the spacing.
As an aside, and possibly of little/no importance the ceiling panel images use 5 different gem images for the gems, except the ceiling for the darkest faerie, which has quite a few oddballs in it, though it may have been rendered differently.
Here's an image of the sorted out so you can see the differences. They're very similar. There might be a 6th gem image, (I didn't check every panel, I just used Kelland here to demonstrate) which would probably make an even stronger argument that the ceilings are meant to match up to the sky somehow.
See, I don't think the TCG constellation images have anything to do with it. They're too had to tell what size they're supposed to be, and like I said about every half a dozen configurations I attempt, I'm able to match up two or more stars/gems, perfectly. I think the same mapping program was created to make the ceiling maps and the night sky image, because of the spacing.
As an aside, and possibly of little/no importance the ceiling panel images use 5 different gem images for the gems, except the ceiling for the darkest faerie, which has quite a few oddballs in it, though it may have been rendered differently.
Here's an image of the sorted out so you can see the differences. They're very similar. There might be a 6th gem image, (I didn't check every panel, I just used Kelland here to demonstrate) which would probably make an even stronger argument that the ceilings are meant to match up to the sky somehow.
Last edited by Kess on Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:00 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:55 am
Question because I missed the whole last thread pretty much:
Are we even sure we can make a constellation yet? Because I'm seeing a lot of people desperately trying and I'm wondering "Are they just trying to see if they can find a constellation or are they just putting out theories as to how one MIGHT find a constellation"
I'm still thinking that they just haven't made it possible to make constellations yet.
Are we even sure we can make a constellation yet? Because I'm seeing a lot of people desperately trying and I'm wondering "Are they just trying to see if they can find a constellation or are they just putting out theories as to how one MIGHT find a constellation"
I'm still thinking that they just haven't made it possible to make constellations yet.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:59 am
http://www.geocities.com/c_shanholtzer/starchartpicc.gif
This is my starchart with what should be the correct size constellations superimposed. I'm trying to match these now instead of using the gems since that got me nowhere:P[/url]
This is my starchart with what should be the correct size constellations superimposed. I'm trying to match these now instead of using the gems since that got me nowhere:P[/url]
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:07 am
How about trying to superimpose the glyphs to the gems instead?
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:09 am
I did that with Sasha, the Dancer because she seems to have six stars. Only one area was close. I tried lining up the stars ans submitting, but it was not accepted in any combination.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/lo ... verlay.jpg
This is in scale from takingscreenies of the actual map and the images extracted from the original flash.
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y30/lo ... verlay.jpg
This is in scale from takingscreenies of the actual map and the images extracted from the original flash.
Last edited by stampsyne on Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:17 am, edited 3 times in total.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:11 am
I don't know if the gems are on the same scale, but the symbols from the flash should be scaled right unless I'm missing the part in the code that changes the size.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:13 am
For anyone trying to narrow down their maps to areas that fit within a certain area, remember that the edges are rounded. I *think* the radius of the telescope is about 190, so you should find the locus of the square that stretches from (-340,-340) to (340,340) within 190. It should look like a square with rounded corners. For those of you who don't understand, don't worry.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:19 am
Okay guys... let me know if I am off base with what I am working on. I am trying to help.
The constellation that is very clear in the sky without the telescope is "The Gatherer" and this TGC card has been down for several days. I was able to locate the picture on EBAY. I have been trying to find that constellation in one of the easier star colors.
What confuses me... is that we can add stars. Can we build our own constellation? Is there something we need to find with coordinates for the stars we use and the stars we build?
Looking forward to thoughts...
The constellation that is very clear in the sky without the telescope is "The Gatherer" and this TGC card has been down for several days. I was able to locate the picture on EBAY. I have been trying to find that constellation in one of the easier star colors.
What confuses me... is that we can add stars. Can we build our own constellation? Is there something we need to find with coordinates for the stars we use and the stars we build?
Looking forward to thoughts...
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:19 am
If you make your generated star maps 1200 X 1200 pixils, it comes out to be close to the right size. I made mine transparant, then stretched it a bit till it fit perfectly over my screen capped star map.
Also if you can get your imaging program to superimpose a grid over your starmap, with 100 x 100 pixil grid lines, the outermost row of boxes on your grid is essentially the throwaway part, due to not being able to pull that bit of sky into your telescope, and you can concentrate your efforts on the visible part of the sky. It's less work.
*edit* Also, I saved my original screen-capped star map so I can cross-check with my ceiling template if I get close. I'm re-doing florin right now, because I didn't realize I'd left it reverse from when I was fiddling with it earlier.
Also if you can get your imaging program to superimpose a grid over your starmap, with 100 x 100 pixil grid lines, the outermost row of boxes on your grid is essentially the throwaway part, due to not being able to pull that bit of sky into your telescope, and you can concentrate your efforts on the visible part of the sky. It's less work.
*edit* Also, I saved my original screen-capped star map so I can cross-check with my ceiling template if I get close. I'm re-doing florin right now, because I didn't realize I'd left it reverse from when I was fiddling with it earlier.
Last edited by Kess on Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:21 am
This really has nothing to do with the plot but how many splits did the last plot have?
far edges of the map
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:23 am
The star map seen thru the telescope does have all the stars in it. The coordinates listed in the box at the bottom right of the map are the coordates of the crosshairs in the telescope. In the following image, I have the cross hairs at -340,-340 and have clicked on a star with the coordinate -412,-512.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a170/manatemuse/starmapextreemeedge.gif
to move the telescope, click on any part of the image that is not a star. that will become the coordinates of the cross hairs
If this has been said before, I appologize, I have not seen it and people keep posting about the high coordinate stars not being visable.
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a170/manatemuse/starmapextreemeedge.gif
to move the telescope, click on any part of the image that is not a star. that will become the coordinates of the cross hairs
If this has been said before, I appologize, I have not seen it and people keep posting about the high coordinate stars not being visable.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:25 am
Yeah but the star coordinates go as high as +/- 590,590 and you can't click over that far.
The map is 1200 x 1200 pixils. Since the middle is zero,zero then theoretically, the star coordinates could go as high as +/- 600, 600, but they didn't put any that close to the edge.
The map is 1200 x 1200 pixils. Since the middle is zero,zero then theoretically, the star coordinates could go as high as +/- 600, 600, but they didn't put any that close to the edge.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:28 am
Kess,
I am trying the same thing you are, with a different method. I'm using darkfire's map (my data), and the gem images. I shrink the gems down 50% to match because the map is shrunk 50%.
I've got a PS doc with the map bg and 2 layers for each gem scene. First layer contains the screen cap and is hidden, 2nd layer has little circles around the gems.
It brings up questions like "Should I rotate?" and "Is the scale correct?" Not to mention "Do I really have a headache?"
What do youguys think about rotating the gems? I think Kess has the right answer on scale. I only we knew the ratio.
I am trying the same thing you are, with a different method. I'm using darkfire's map (my data), and the gem images. I shrink the gems down 50% to match because the map is shrunk 50%.
I've got a PS doc with the map bg and 2 layers for each gem scene. First layer contains the screen cap and is hidden, 2nd layer has little circles around the gems.
It brings up questions like "Should I rotate?" and "Is the scale correct?" Not to mention "Do I really have a headache?"
What do youguys think about rotating the gems? I think Kess has the right answer on scale. I only we knew the ratio.
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:32 am
Has there been any reports of someone correctly matching a star constellation?
It seems to me like, the odds of that happening is pretty good, that one of the couple thousand neopians that are currently trying to figure out this puzzle has randomly matched 6 correct stars.
I'm going to put this out there, that TNT has not released the next part of the plot (and thus us not being able to match any constellations), and hope that one of the TNT staff (psst dirtside) will come by and tell us otherwise (like in the LDP)
It seems to me like, the odds of that happening is pretty good, that one of the couple thousand neopians that are currently trying to figure out this puzzle has randomly matched 6 correct stars.
I'm going to put this out there, that TNT has not released the next part of the plot (and thus us not being able to match any constellations), and hope that one of the TNT staff (psst dirtside) will come by and tell us otherwise (like in the LDP)
Sun Mar 26, 2006 6:35 am
In an earlier split, several people said their map changed for a few minutes every two hours and then changed back. Does anyone know if or when this happens?
I've had the same map since last night, but if the map does change occasionally and then change back, then it seems likely that whatever we're supposed to find would be on the temporary map and not the regular map.
That is of course, if the map does change.
I've had the same map since last night, but if the map does change occasionally and then change back, then it seems likely that whatever we're supposed to find would be on the temporary map and not the regular map.
That is of course, if the map does change.