Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Stellarium V 0.19.1

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 iandh2010

iandh2010

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2005
  • Loc: England

Posted 16 September 2019 - 07:19 PM

Hi Guys,

Hope this is posted in the correct forum!

 

I have just downloaded Stellarium 64 bit V 0.19.1 and I am just setting it up on my new computer.

 

Can anyone tell me where they have moved the settings window that enable the selection of observing locations and also select from a list of well known sites, as well as defining ones own.

 

I think that it looks good and has certainly cured the problem of NGC7662 and NGC2392 not being shown correctly, for some reason!

 

I had set up a number of presets for observing sites so would like to be able to  set these up again in the new version.

 

Advice greatly appreciated!

 

Regards

Ian



#2 PatrickVt

PatrickVt

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 270
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2018
  • Loc: Vermont, US

Posted 16 September 2019 - 08:15 PM

Those icons are on a popup sidebar on the left side of the screen.  Just hover near the lower part of the left sidebar and the icon bar of settings will slide out.

 

Patrick



#3 catalogman

catalogman

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 998
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2014

Posted 16 September 2019 - 08:21 PM

<snip>

 

I think that it looks good and has certainly cured the problem of NGC7662 and NGC2392 not being shown correctly, for some reason!

 

<snip>

 

The error was probably copied correctly from HyperLeda:

 

NGC 2392 = PGC 2860341

NGC 7662 = PGC 165926

 

-- catalogman



#4 iandh2010

iandh2010

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2005
  • Loc: England

Posted 17 September 2019 - 08:56 AM

Hi Patrick,

Many thanks, I knew that the menus hide off the display until you mouse over them but I thought that I used to set up the locations by clicking what I have always thought of as the "compass" icon. I now realise is probably a astrolabe "calculations"  icon.

 

I now realise that the top icon is a compass direction rose for "location".

 

Doh..................


  • PatrickVt likes this

#5 iandh2010

iandh2010

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2005
  • Loc: England

Posted 17 September 2019 - 09:01 AM

The error was probably copied correctly from HyperLeda:

 

NGC 2392 = PGC 2860341

NGC 7662 = PGC 165926

 

-- catalogman

Hi Catalogman,

Those particular errors have been there for quite some time, on many previous releases of Stellarium. I first noted them last week on my older version 0.16.1 and also my friend's 0.18.??

 

Is there is a formal way of advising the Stellarium developers of such things?



#6 Alexander Wolf

Alexander Wolf

    Stellarium

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 409
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2011
  • Loc: Barnaul, Siberia, Russia

Posted 17 September 2019 - 11:10 AM

The error was probably copied correctly from HyperLeda:

 

NGC 2392 = PGC 2860341

NGC 7662 = PGC 165926

 

-- catalogman

NGC 2392 != PGC 2860341 - confirmed and fixed (the fix will be available in v0.19.2)

NGC 7662 = PGC 165926 - it's correct record



#7 catalogman

catalogman

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 998
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2014

Posted 17 September 2019 - 06:38 PM

Actually, many planetaries (including all of them in the NGC/IC) have PGC numbers. (See att. list.)  For

consistency, Stellarium should either keep them all or remove them all.

 

I may have been wrong to suggest that display problems with some objects are due to clashing identifications.

In my check, several planetaries (noted in the attachment) displayed only the green search reticle with no label

and no symbol -- they had no PGC label to clash with, so this is not the source of the display problem. (I used

Stellarium 0.19.0 on a live DVD of Astronomy Linux 19.04.)

 

-- catalogman

Attached Files



#8 obrazell

obrazell

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 405
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2005
  • Loc: United Kingdom

Posted 17 September 2019 - 08:05 PM

Interesting because if you ask SIMBAD or NED for those PGC numbers they return nothing so it looks like they have been edited out. Similarly SIMBAD gives no cross reference under NGC 2392 for any PGC/LEDA number.

 

Owen



#9 Alexander Wolf

Alexander Wolf

    Stellarium

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 409
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2011
  • Loc: Barnaul, Siberia, Russia

Posted 17 September 2019 - 11:29 PM

Actually, many planetaries (including all of them in the NGC/IC) have PGC numbers. (See att. list.)  For
consistency, Stellarium should either keep them all or remove them all.
 
I may have been wrong to suggest that display problems with some objects are due to clashing identifications.
In my check, several planetaries (noted in the attachment) displayed only the green search reticle with no label
and no symbol -- they had no PGC label to clash with, so this is not the source of the display problem. (I used
Stellarium 0.19.0 on a live DVD of Astronomy Linux 19.04.)
 
-- catalogman

What is the source for cross-identification for NGC and PGC subset in attachment? For example I've check first cross-id line - NGC 40 = PGC 2923327 - and I did not find this cross-id nor in SIMBAD, nor in NED. I've checked few other cross-id lines and I didn't find cross-id data in SIMBAD and NED too.

#10 beggarly

beggarly

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 728
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015
  • Loc: Belgium

Posted 18 September 2019 - 03:36 AM

https://cseligman.co.../atlas/ngc0.htm

NGC 40 = "PGC 2923327" - quote "... the PGC designation is essentially useless..."

 

A querry on http://vizier.u-strasbg.fr/

for PGC shows this result: VII/237, 9.833e+5 records, HYPERLEDA. I. Catalog of galaxies (Paturel+, 2003)

for LEDA                        : VII/242, 7.532e+5 records, LEDA galaxies with DENIS measurements catalog (Paturel+, 2005) Catalog

Both catalogs contain PGC identifiers.

 

http://leda.univ-lyo.../param/pgc.html


Edited by beggarly, 18 September 2019 - 10:18 AM.


#11 catalogman

catalogman

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 998
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2014

Posted 18 September 2019 - 02:00 PM

What is the source for cross-identification for NGC and PGC subset in attachment? For example I've check first cross-id line - NGC 40 = PGC 2923327 - and I did not find this cross-id nor in SIMBAD, nor in NED. I've checked few other cross-id lines and I didn't find cross-id data in SIMBAD and NED too.

That's an important omission, sorry!

 

The source of the NGC/IC=PGC numbers in the attachment is HyperLEDA:

 

http://leda.univ-lyon1.fr/search.html

 

Type in the NGC/IC Object designation and click on the "LEDA (extended display)" button.

The PGC number displayed in the upper-right corner is an internal PGC number which
may not be recognized in other databases:

 

http://leda.univ-lyo.../param/pgc.html

 

These internal numbers aren't meant to be used -- they're placeholders for objects that
were later found to be planetaries (object type = 'p'). What I don't understand is why
so many of them remain in HyperLEDA.

 

-- catalogman



#12 JoeInMN

JoeInMN

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Minneapolis, MN, USA

Posted 21 September 2019 - 02:39 PM

Hello Mr. Wolf,

 

Running 0.19.01 on Linux Mint 19.1 Cinnamon here. I have an ongoing minor issue with the Oculars plugin; this may or may not be in your purview, but maybe you can help straighten it out... Selecting a telescope seems to cause incorrect magnification in the displayed image, though the numbers shown in the control panel look OK. The workaround is to then select a different ocular, which seems to correct the image, and then re-selecting the original ocular. Changing the ocular works fine from that point on, until a different telescope is selected; that will glitch the image again, requiring an ocular juggle to correct it as before. I call it a minor issue because the workaround is so easy, and I don't know whether other users have run into this, or whether it's just me...

 

Attached screenshot should enlarge when clicked.

 

Thanks to the entire Stellarium development team for producing this outstanding software!

 

stellarium_oculars_issue_001.jpg


Edited by JoeInMN, 21 September 2019 - 02:41 PM.

  • scottmm2012 likes this

#13 PatrickVt

PatrickVt

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 270
  • Joined: 20 Apr 2018
  • Loc: Vermont, US

Posted 21 September 2019 - 06:22 PM

Hello Mr. Wolf,

 

Running 0.19.01 on Linux Mint 19.1 Cinnamon here. I have an ongoing minor issue with the Oculars plugin; this may or may not be in your purview, but maybe you can help straighten it out... Selecting a telescope seems to cause incorrect magnification in the displayed image, though the numbers shown in the control panel look OK. The workaround is to then select a different ocular, which seems to correct the image, and then re-selecting the original ocular. Changing the ocular works fine from that point on, until a different telescope is selected; that will glitch the image again, requiring an ocular juggle to correct it as before. I call it a minor issue because the workaround is so easy, and I don't know whether other users have run into this, or whether it's just me...

 

Attached screenshot should enlarge when clicked.

 

Thanks to the entire Stellarium development team for producing this outstanding software!

 

attachicon.gif stellarium_oculars_issue_001.jpg

I have the same problem on Windows 64 bit.  I never mentioned because I figured others have already reported the problem.  

 

Patrick



#14 Alexander Wolf

Alexander Wolf

    Stellarium

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 409
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2011
  • Loc: Barnaul, Siberia, Russia

Posted 24 September 2019 - 12:35 PM

It's strange. Would you check the latest beta?



#15 JoeInMN

JoeInMN

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Minneapolis, MN, USA

Posted 24 September 2019 - 07:16 PM

I should say that I update via this daily build ppa (tried to unlink the URL part but apparently don't know how):

deb-src http://ppa.launchpad...um/daily/ubuntu bionic main

 

It could be that this is happening because I'm running some sort of bleeding-edge version... My package manager shows that I have this installed:

0.99.1+201909241519~ubuntu18.04.1

 

It's really the only issue that I can think of, that I run into with Stellarium.


Edited by JoeInMN, 24 September 2019 - 07:22 PM.


#16 Alexander Wolf

Alexander Wolf

    Stellarium

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 409
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2011
  • Loc: Barnaul, Siberia, Russia

Posted 24 September 2019 - 09:37 PM

Could you share your oculars.ini file?



#17 JoeInMN

JoeInMN

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Minneapolis, MN, USA

Posted 24 September 2019 - 10:24 PM

This is from the ~/.stellarium/modules/Oculars directory...

 

 

[General]
arrow_scale=1.5
ccd_count=1
ccd_crop_overlay_size=250
ccd_index=0
enable_control_panel=true
hide_grids_and_lines=false
lens_count=2
lens_index=-1
limit_stellar_magnitude=true
ocular_count=9
ocular_index=2
oculars_version=3.1
require_selection_to_zoom=false
show_ccd_crop_overlay=false
show_resolution_criterions=false
show_toolbar_button=false
stars_scale_absolute=1.00
stars_scale_absolute_ccd=1.00
stars_scale_relative=1.00
stars_scale_relative_ccd=1.00
telescope_count=10
telescope_index=7
use_decimal_degrees=false
use_initial_direction=false
use_initial_fov=false
use_max_exit_circle=true
use_mount_autoset=false
use_semi_transparency=true
use_telrad_fov_scaling=true

[ccd]
0\binningX=1
0\binningY=1
0\chip_height=14.8
0\chip_rot_angle=0
0\chip_width=22.2
0\has_oag=false
0\name=EOS 450D
0\pixel_height=5.2
0\pixel_width=5.2
0\prism_distance=0
0\prism_height=0
0\prism_pos_angle=0
0\prism_width=0
0\resolutionX=4272
0\resolutionY=2848

[lens]
0\multipler=2
0\name=Barlow 2x
1\multipler=3
1\name=Barlow 3x

[ocular]
0\afov=7
0\binoculars=true
0\efl=10
0\fieldStop=0
0\name=10x50
0\permanentCrosshair=false
0\reticlePath=
1\afov=50
1\binoculars=false
1\efl=25
1\fieldStop=0
1\name=25mm Vixen NPL
1\permanentCrosshair=false
1\reticlePath=
2\afov=54
2\binoculars=false
2\efl=18
2\fieldStop=0
2\name=18mm Kellner
2\permanentCrosshair=false
2\reticlePath=
3\afov=55
3\binoculars=false
3\efl=15
3\fieldStop=0
3\name=15mm Plossl
3\permanentCrosshair=false
3\reticlePath=
4\afov=50
4\binoculars=false
4\efl=12
4\fieldStop=0
4\name=12mm Plossl
4\permanentCrosshair=false
4\reticlePath=
5\afov=50
5\binoculars=false
5\efl=7
5\fieldStop=0
5\name=7mm Plossl
5\permanentCrosshair=false
5\reticlePath=
6\afov=35
6\binoculars=false
6\efl=20
6\fieldStop=0
6\name=.965\" 20mm Huygens
6\permanentCrosshair=false
6\reticlePath=
7\afov=35
7\binoculars=false
7\efl=12.5
7\fieldStop=0
7\name=.965\" 12.5mm Huygens
7\permanentCrosshair=false
7\reticlePath=
8\afov=35
8\binoculars=false
8\efl=4
8\fieldStop=0
8\name=.965\" 4mm Huygens
8\permanentCrosshair=false
8\reticlePath=

[telescope]
0\diameter=152
0\equatorial=false
0\focalLength=1219
0\hFlip=true
0\name=6\" f/8
0\vFlip=true
1\diameter=152
1\equatorial=false
1\focalLength=756
1\hFlip=true
1\name=6\" f/5
1\vFlip=true
2\diameter=102
2\equatorial=true
2\focalLength=1000
2\hFlip=true
2\name=102mm f/10
2\vFlip=false
3\diameter=102
3\equatorial=true
3\focalLength=650
3\hFlip=true
3\name=102mm f/6.4
3\vFlip=false
4\diameter=80
4\equatorial=true
4\focalLength=560
4\hFlip=true
4\name=80mm f/7
4\vFlip=false
5\diameter=60
5\equatorial=true
5\focalLength=710
5\hFlip=true
5\name=60mm f/11.6
5\vFlip=false
6\diameter=60
6\equatorial=false
6\focalLength=415
6\hFlip=true
6\name=60mm f/7
6\vFlip=false
7\diameter=45
7\equatorial=false
7\focalLength=358
7\hFlip=true
7\name=45mm f/8 mirrored image
7\vFlip=false
8\diameter=45
8\equatorial=true
8\focalLength=358
8\hFlip=true
8\name=45mm erect image
8\vFlip=true
9\diameter=45
9\equatorial=false
9\focalLength=358
9\hFlip=true
9\name=45mm f/8 straight thru
9\vFlip=true



#18 Alexander Wolf

Alexander Wolf

    Stellarium

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 409
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2011
  • Loc: Barnaul, Siberia, Russia

Posted 09 October 2019 - 11:24 AM

OK, it was hard, but I've found the "bad guy" for this strange behavior of Oculars plugin. So, the next problem - how fix one bug and do not introduce new one.


  • mikenoname and PatrickVt like this

#19 JoeInMN

JoeInMN

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2015
  • Loc: Minneapolis, MN, USA

Posted 10 October 2019 - 01:18 AM

OK, it was hard, but I've found the "bad guy" for this strange behavior of Oculars plugin. So, the next problem - how fix one bug and do not introduce new one.

Thanks for working on this! Stellarium is amazing.



#20 iandh2010

iandh2010

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 243
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2005
  • Loc: England

Posted 10 October 2019 - 02:58 AM

Well done to Alexander and JoeInMN.

I agree that Stellarium is amazing and it will be even better with you guys working together on this bug!




CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics