Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:41 am
moihaha wrote:the other way will be to copy down every coordinates of the second sky by hand....
but I dont think I have enough courage to do so!!!!
Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:43 am
Troggy7 wrote:So we have to get BOTH skys mapped?
Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:45 am
theonlysaneone wrote:moihaha wrote:the other way will be to copy down every coordinates of the second sky by hand....
but I dont think I have enough courage to do so!!!!
You could repeatedly take screenies of the different views, moved over little by little, and then compile an image. That would probably be much easier. That was the way people did it before darkfire's map generator.
Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:46 am
Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:50 am
UncleJohn wrote:Aye guys I havnt maped nor plan to, but I was thinking, has anyone tried making a trasnperancy copy of the second set of stars and over laping it with the first to see if any formations are shared? If so then that would be a BIG clue..
*shrugs.*Just a thought.
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:01 am
UncleJohn wrote:Aye guys I havnt maped nor plan to, but I was thinking, has anyone tried making a trasnperancy copy of the second set of stars and over laping it with the first to see if any formations are shared? If so then that would be a BIG clue..
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:16 am
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:16 am
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:18 am
theonlysaneone wrote:Has anyone tried superimposing the constellation images on top of the blue gems? That seems like the next logical step.
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:27 am
gemma58 wrote:With just a quick glance the maps DO appear significantly different and I DO have what appears to be the equivalent of the Sasha glyph (Blue line drawing) on my SECOND data map.
Went to the observatory and still had second data field of view! (was happy about this)
However can only find HALF of the Sasha glyph constellation on my field of view in comparison to the mapped second data. It is towards the edge of the field of view (that is 340 on the axis) even though stars appear within the field of view have co-ordinates that include: 474, -324 and 500, -170.
Am currently looking at both DATA maps to see if any correlation can be made.
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:38 am
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:40 am
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:40 am
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:49 am
Sunsinger wrote:I as well, I thought I saw two constellions of the eyes and one of the tambourine, didn't work but I'm gonna keep trying ::smirk:: Question, most constellations have several different stars of magnitiude, why must we connext only red stars or only purple?
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:53 am