Generic PTA testing scenario - suggestions please!

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Adam,

 

Discussed this with a friend earlier this evening and he suggested it might be worth looking at the programs being used to resize the TIFF image and then saving subsequently as a JPEG. Well, if it ain't P3D and we accept that Monitor Calibration is irrelevant then could these observed differences have something to do with the coding methods used to manipulate our respective images? I have been using Windows 'Paint' which might not be the best for this purpose. What have you been using, or do you think this might prove to be yet another herring of the red variety?

 

Regards,

Mike

[Adamski_NZ 942]

I have to say that of all the available image apps out there, MS paint would be my last choice!!! I had to fork out a fortune to use Photoshop for my work - but it's worth every penny/cent.

 

You can test your theory by comparing my TIFF file (in the archive) with your TIFF file - on the same PC/monitor. If the two TIFFs are identical, then we can blame MS Paint!

 

Adam.

[Cruachan 705]

You can test your theory by comparing my TIFF file (in the archive) with your TIFF file - on the same PC/monitor. If the two TIFFs are identical, then we can blame MS Paint!

Hi Adam,

 

I compared the two images, as you suggested, and they are different in the same way they have shown differences in previously posted images in this thread. However, I agree that it is very likely Microsoft Paint will sport inferior image processing routines which are okay for cheap an cheerful quick edits whereas on closer scrutiny will reveal shortcomings.

 

To test this theory I decided to purchase and install PhotoShop Elements 15. I imagine it uses the same processing modules as are employed in the CC versions while being a heck of a lot cheaper! To date my latest build was intended primarily as a 'gaming' platform, but I recognise that this purpose would evolve over time. Having a capable image editor on board can only be a worthwhile asset and so, I reasoned, the expenditure was justified 😜 First impressions are very good as in use it seems very intuitive. However......while perhaps being a little better, the saved resized 1280x720 JPEG image still does not match yours.

 

So, it looks like the image editor has not been responsible after all. Pity. Whatever the reason, I think we may have to accept that there will always be differences in the appearance of identical images when compared on ostensibly similar system hardware and software setups. In the end, what is more important is how that image appears in isolation on our respective monitors.

 

Part of the reason for my delay in updating my experiences in this thread has been due to me turning my attention, once again, to Monitor Calibration. I have had discussions with the people at X-Rite who have provided me with a fresh set of instructions for correct use of my ColorMunki Photo. This has resolved my previous difficulties and the PG278Q has now been recalibrated successfully! What I found surprising was having to back off my brightness setting before recalibration started. The original setting was 80 and now it is 22! Yes the onscreen image is now slightly 'darker' and the whites now appear less so, but it is surprising how quickly you become accustomed to the change and start accepting the new 'norm' because this new 'norm' is very impressive indeed!

 

If ever it existed before, there are now no remaining doubts in my mind about the importance of Monitor Colour Calibration. If anyone is really serious about wanting to see greater colour accuracy and detail in their onscreen images and, most certainly, that includes the imagery produced by Adam's PTA Presets, then achieving a reasonably accurate monitor recalibration profile must be the way to go. The results are truly extraordinary! I flew for well over 2 hours last night exploring NZSI just south of the northern coast and southern Norway (both courtesy of ORBX) and the details were stunning and must be about as close to simulated reality as is currently possible. Even the water looked convincing.

 

For those who may be interested in giving this a go here is a useful article:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/monitor-calibration.htm

 

Be sure to make a note of/backup your current settings and/or installed default Monitor Profile before changing anything.

 

I used these images to check my monitor's recalibrated accuracy against the provided images and it passed muster impressively.

 

There are many tutorials on the Internet which take you through the Windows monitor recalibration routines. I would have gone down that route had I not been able to use the X‑Rite ColorMunki Photo Colorimeter / colour calibrator.

 

I have confirmed that Patrick and Thorsten (THOPAT) use Colour Calibrated Monitors for their work so it's a safe bet that users of their Presets are not seeing exactly what was intended by the authors.

 

Also, and to wind this up, I must say, Adam, that your 20_10 Scenario 02 image now appears even better than before 👍

 

Regards,

Mike

[Cruachan 705]

 

Colour Aware Web Browsers

 

Here is an interesting article which might be considered pertinent to this discussion:

https://fstoppers.com/education/how-your-web-browser-affects-way-colors-are-rendered-77241

 

Also, these Test Cards might help to determine how well calibrated your monitor is right now:

https://panoramashots.co.uk/technical-notes/test-cards/

 

Mike

[Adamski_NZ 942]

I compared the two images, as you suggested, and they are different in the same way they have shown differences in previously posted images in this thread. However, I agree that it is very likely Microsoft Paint will sport inferior image processing routines which are okay for cheap an cheerful quick edits whereas on closer scrutiny will reveal shortcomings.

 

Now that you have PSE 15 (good job!!), could you have a go at loading both TIFF images to compare?

 

Some great info in your posts (thanks) - particularly the colour-aware browsers stuff. Good to know my trusty old Firefox is up to it!

 

Adam.

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Adam,

 

I've done things a little differently this time. Your TIFF image is larger than mine so I cropped the image to exclude the menu bar. After resizing, your image is still a little larger at 1280x746 (100%), but near enough to mine which is, after resizing, 1280x720 (100%). Each TIFF image was captured in PhotoShop Elements 15 using the Windows7 Snipping Tool.

 

1. I have included a Histogram in each image which does help to clarify the various differences between them.

2. I repeated the procedure after Disabling SLI on the off chance SLI might be involved in some way.

3. Lastly I renamed Prepar3D.cfg and deleted the content of the Shader cache to start with a clean slate (The relevant ShadersHLSL remained untouched with the previously applied adam_pta20_10 Preset tweaks).

4. The Prepar3D default Scenario was loaded and the shader cache rebuilt.

5. ChasePlane was terminated.

6. PTA Generic TEST 02 was loaded.

 

Adam_PTA_Generic_Test_02 (Histogram).JPG

 

Mike (SLI)_Generic_Test_02 (Histogram)_.JPG

 

Mike (No SLI)_Generic_Test_02 (Histogram)_.JPG

 

Mike (SLI)_Generic_Test_02 (Histogram)_(Fresh P3D.cfg and Shader Cache).JPG

 

BTW, I changed the runway tarmac texture - looks nearly the same as in your image.

 

Regards,

Mike

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Adam,

 

Forgot to add that I use Mozilla Firefox as well. Have done so for many years. Very reliable browser with very few unwanted vices.

 

Regards,

Mike

[Adamski_NZ 942]

More good stuff, Mike!!!

 

I'm wondering whether we're "going around the houses" a bit with the TIFF thing, though. For *direct comparison* with my reference TIFF image, you should be comparing it to one of yours that's saved with the "V" key, as that appears to save the raw P3D output - before it gets changed by the system.

 

However - those "after the event" screengrabs are still very intriguing!

 

Adam.

[Cruachan 705]

For *direct comparison* with my reference TIFF image, you should be comparing it to one of yours that's saved with the "V" key, as that appears to save the raw P3D output

Hi Adam,

 

Forgive me, but am I missing something? I believe that is precisely what you are seeing. Those images are all resized TIFF images, including your reference image. I included the histogram in each case to eliminate any possible observational subjectivity although, I think you would agree, the differences are clear enough. The images you see are simply JPEG grabs of the Raw TIFF images as displayed in PSE 15. I verified that the histograms were unchanged by the resizing operation. So, even if you ignore the appearance of the images the histograms are there to tell the true story. The TIFF images have not undergone conversion to JPEG before capture by the Snipping Tool.

 

As previously, each of my Raw TIFF images was saved from Prepar3D using the "V" key.

 

Edit: Not sure why there are no values for 'Level', 'Count' and 'Percentile' in each of my histograms.

 

Regards,

Mike

[Adamski_NZ 942]

As previously, each of my Raw TIFF images was saved from Prepar3D using the "V" key.

 

Great - that's what I was keen on clearing up :wink: !

 

 

These are the test02 (TIFF) histograms. Yours (as displayed here) on the left and mine (on my P3D PC) on the right. They're *almost* identical, but not quite. I have a couple of tiny bars (red and blue) that aren't there on yours. Not sure if the differences are great enough to be visible, but I'd have thought those two histograms ought to be identical ... unless PC CS5 generates a more detailed histogram than PSE 5.

 

Values for 'Level', 'Count' and 'Percentile' only show when your cursor is hovering over something.

 

Adam.

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Adam,

 

Looking at your histogram on the right I note that in addition to those red and blue bars, the green between the red an blue has a much higher peak than in mine. These represent the primary colours so I'm wondering whether this could be due to the inclusion of the P3D menu bar in your displayed image? You will note that I cropped it out as part of my effort to match your image content as closely as possible.

 

So, has this demonstration now ruled out our P3D software installations as being the origin of my observed differences? As yet I'm still not sure. If that proves to be the case then have we narrowed this down to being due to the output from the graphics card/s installed in our respective rigs and how they are interpreting the embedded colour information (which are different) in the saved images? Your histograms appear to suggest that this is not correct either. The histograms in post #66 confirm these differences causing my images to appear more autumnal than yours which has a more spring-like or summery feel. Have you compared my image with yours at your end, Adam? If you would like to test then let me know and I can supply a full sized Raw TIFF image for you to use.

 

Regards,

Mike

[Adamski_NZ 942]

Yes, Mike - the menu thing did occur to me after I'd thought about my last posting.

 

If you can put your full-size TIFF file somewhere I can grab it, it'd be great to see if it'll "help with our enquiries" (so to speak!). Zipped up and put on some *file* sharing host would be best - not unzipped/and on image host, as they often run compression routines on uploaded pics.

 

Like you, I'm about 99% certain that these two TIFFs will be nigh-on identical. Though this appears not to help us much (as there are so many ways the final image we see on our monitors can change) - but at least we'll know (as you say) that P3D+PTA is producing consistent results at a low level, which is something, I guess!!!

 

A bit like an adventure game, this! LOL!

 

Adam.

[Cruachan 705]

Hi Adam,

 

Here's the link to the requested zip archive: https://personal.filesanywhere.com/fs/v.aspx?v=8d6f638b5a6371baa968

 

I've included my flight scenario files in case you would like to try them. I suppose it's just possible that there may be something different in these files although it does seem very unlikely.

 

It's all a bit like searching for that elusive pot of gold at the end of the rainbow!

 

Regards,

Mike

[Adamski_NZ 942]

Thanks, Mike - duly grabbed!    I'll report back!

 

Adam.

[Adamski_NZ 942]

Mike - please check your PMs. The two TIFF files ended up looking quite different (sigh!!) ... so there are a couple of things I'd like to try!

 

Adam.