Hello. I am trying to simulate how the horizon would look like for a human standing on the earth. perhaps id also like to simulate how the horizon would look like if you went upwards one kilometer, two kilometer…
i don’t really need the whole ball. only the viewable part from humans fov… i don’t even necessarily need to render it if it would be too much for blender or something. viewport would be ok…
Is it possible to do this in blender? how would i go about this. ive gone through 8 tuts and done two of my own pictures/renders so im quite a noob still.
that gives you distance but still need bit more to get right curvature
I mean not so easy a problem at low altitude almost not visible
but very visible from space station !
The angular radius part might not be intepreted right, just a quick example. There’s a custom property on the mesh object where you can set the altitude in kilometers. The mesh has a simple deform modifier set to bend the top of the mesh and the angle is controlled with a driver. The driver takes the custom property and calculates the angle.
That could be animated, all in small scale, and none of the objects are moving.
Umm. Doesn’t this mean the earth is flat? if the settings are correct i mean, because it starts curving immediately. For example i took a plane at 11000 meters just a couple days ago and the horizon was completely flat. According to this program it should be curved.
it also rose to my eyelevel. not like it is seen in this program. edit: i guess the eyelevel thing is not simulated here. but still, curvature should be seen pretty fast but of course it isnt in real life. it’s stuff like this that makes me a flat earther :S
i thought that this simulation should be good enough? when i tried doing what you say there werent enough vertices on the sphere to present it accurately.
This one has the circumference of half the earth in 1:100 scale, and the camera distance to the horizon is also 1:100.
Blender is not a simulation software, it’s an animation suite, so more like a visualization software. If it’s visually accurate, then it’s enough, but things don’t have to be dimensionally accurate to the real world. It would become really hard to work on objects that are really small (microbes) or really big (planets, galaxies).
I don’t know what kind of visuals you want so the example is just about the curvature. Not accurate, but you figure out if those mechanisms could be used to visualize it the way you want. I’m not spending more time on it.
ok. thanks for your work. i will see if i can understand how it works. i just wanted to figure out how much curvature should be seen depending on altitude. even online you have people - not flat-earthers - claiming you are supposed to see curvature from low up, however i have never seen any curvature in rl or in videos – except in fisheye lense videos and from nasa and such but of course that would be faked if it really was a conspiracy and i already know we didnt go to the moon so.
