How do you get the scale right, for super big megastructure?Take something like pic related, the Ringworld. You look at the horizon, towards the ring, what should it look like? Do you see the horizon curve upwards and getting more and more narrow, forming an arch that crosses the sky?Or is the curvature so large that you don't see it curve upward, instead looking like a very narrow line, all the way?Is there, perhaps, a 3D program I could use, make simple models of the structures and see what they would look like from different points of perspective?
Do you guys need someone to tie your shoes for you too, or what
>>7455149Sounds like a math problem, perhaps try a math subreddit or math stackexchange?
>>7455149I think that image could have done a better job of indicating curvature by adding mountain ranges that function as leading lines and indicators of the curvature. Adding clouds towards the horizon lines makes it seem disconnected from the rest of the ring. Your question isn't a matter of how it should look, but scale of the ring. If the ring was massive, it would just look like a flat plane that tapers extending to a narrow point in the distance that extends into the sky due to how we perceive depth. Your image scales down the size of the ring for dramatic effect and so that we can see a curve extending into the sky.
>>7455195That's pretty much correct, except the part about the narrow point. That depends on the width of the ring. It might just look like a long flat plane that tapers upwards very very subtly. OP's question really is just question of scale. There isn't one right answer because it depends entirely on the dimensions of the ring.
>>7455149Something very small and very close would look the same as something extremely big and far away as long as they have the same angular diameter from your point of view. You don't need a 3d program or advanced math. Just use your eyes, retard.
>>7455215>it depends entirely on the dimensions of the ringRingworld dimension is known. Anyways The correct answer is most likely flat normal horizon + a single very narrow vertical line. But that doesn't look appealing.
>>7455215Made me want to try painting it
>>7455195>>7455215>depends on the scaleI'm aware. My question isn't "how to represent it" but "given a megastructure of X size, how can I figure out what it would look like for an observer, typically on the surface".And, yeah,>>7455181 it is a problem of math/optics in a way. But, fuck, if doing a bit of geometry to get the perspective right is part of art.Plus, as mentioned, maybe there are programs out there, that can be used to model celestial objects, which could give a clear answer easily. Way back when, I would have tried Bryce 3D.
>>7455607It seems to me you want a quantitative answer. There might be some overlap here between perspective, geometry and what you're seeking, but if you want an exact answer you'd need to actually do math. Most of the answers here sufficiently explain the concept well enough for illustrations, just not in the way you're wanting, and I think other boards would be more qualified.
>>7455607Realistically, this is a situation where you have to guess. The scales here are just too big to realistically construct by hand. You could probably measure interval segments on the ring by apparent diameter and connect them, but that's so sensitive to initial measurements that you're not going to get anywhere near consistent results to the degree where you might as well just bullshit it.
