Shadow Quality differences in pictures

[styckx 1,871]

Continuing my series of over-the-top animated gifs to show what things actually do.

 

Why I am doing this - Because I feel people (myself included) are just setting things to ultra without not only realizing the performance consequences but also not realizing that "ultra" doesn't necessarily result in "the best"..  Or.. Not even that big of a difference.. 

 

Todays Episode: Shadows Quality

 

Low/Medium/High/Ultra

 

Now.. The hilarious part of Shadow quality... Lower = The best..  Why do you ask? Because they're soft shadows..  Shadows are not an instant hard cut off.. Hard shadows look unnatural.. ie: Stencil Shadows.  Nvidia and a lot of video game makers go to great lengths to soften shadows.

 

Warning - 2MB+ Animated GIF

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7357/11420982496_a1d7ac3fdb_o.gif

 

Conclusion: Turn your shadows to low-medium.. You're not missing a thing.

 

Edit: I suggest medium.. Low highlights a flickering/wicking effect of some shadows while in motion in certain lighting conditions

[Jean-Paul 167]

Continuing my series of over-the-top animated gifs to show what things actually do.

 

Keep'em coming, Bill. They're very helpful :good:

[styckx 1,871]

The only draw back of the low settings that've seen is a "flickering" / "wicking" effect on the edge of some of the shadows with some aircraft in motion.. It's in high/ultra too but low seems to amplify it. Specifically ones installed that were for FSX or ESP carry overs. I'm not worried about it though. I'm in the cockpit 95% of the time.. So the less overhead by eyecandy I don't stare at the better.

 

Didn't even notice it until this little test because I was actually paying direct attention to the shadows.. As the old saying goes.. If you stare at something long enough you can find faults in any thing..  :lol:

[MikeT707 1,181]

These series that you are doing will be very helpful for the community.  Thanks and keep em coming.  

 

 

Conclusion: Turn your shadows to low-medium.. You're not missing a thing.
 
Edit: I suggest medium.. Low highlights a flickering/wicking effect of some shadows while in motion in certain lighting conditions

Do you have any data points in terms of performance differences among the four settings?

[styckx 1,871]

These series that you are doing will be very helpful for the community.  Thanks and keep em coming.  

 

 

Do you have any data points in terms of performance differences among the four settings?

 

Nope.. I thought about it, and know I mentioned it in the OP but that involves so many variables I decided against it...

 

To follow up with this.

 

If I said "Low to Ultra is a 300MB of VRAM difference"

 

I bet two seconds later someone would say "I notice no difference in VRAM usage"

 

Because of system variables...

[MikeT707 1,181]

 

 

Nope.. I thought about it, and know I mentioned it in the OP but that involves so many variables I decided against it...

Fair enough.  I will test it on my system and see what results I get.  Thanks again.

[Guest]

Nice! I like your animated gifs!

 

One note I'd like to make about this one: when looking at your picture, people may think the low to ultra settings only make a difference in what you see here, the quality (edges) of the plane's shadows. But there is a lot more to those slider setting so you might also want to make a picture which shows the differences in the shadow distances and complexity on for instance the terrain!

 

And while I am at it (sorry! ^_^ ) I would like an extra second before each picture switches to the next one so I can study the differences a bit better. :rolleyes: ^_^ Other than that: keep them coming!