HDR v2.2 vs v2.4 ...

[Richard Sennett 2,499]

Increasing the value (default is ".35f") should increase the brightness for base textures as it will provide more "feedback" to blending reflections/base textures.  I prefer a tad lower value as that seems to work better with my other HDR settings.

 

 

Thanks Rob - just wanted to hear from the Man what I suspected - play wit h that tonight

[denali 74]

Thanks from here too for the settings Rob.

[airlinejets 709]

 

 

From what I've seen no ... but I'll load up historical weather and same location and same time/day using REX clouds for comparison (probably not today, but this weekend for sure).



The blue patches of sky might be related to cloud choice and/or cloud density setting in P3D. If I don't set P3D to max cloud density, I will see blue patches with ASN also.

 

Ok, thanks Rob.

[Noel 4,484]

 

 

The other alternative is if one has the v2.2 HDR.HLSL, you can just copy that into v2.4 and delete the "shaders" (assuming one has a backup of v2.4 HDR.HLSL).

 

I wonder if anyone could post the V2.2 HDR.HLSL file.  Rob, does LM listen to any of this discussion about cloud contrast, HDR intensity, etc?  Where do they get the direction to take on these areas if not from multiple users.

[Guest]

 

 

Rob, does LM listen to any of this discussion about cloud contrast, HDR intensity, etc?

 

LM listen to everything ... but what you discuss is personal preference and they probably try to avoid getting to involved in that.  They also leave certain doors open to allow for creative 3rd party "ideas".

 

I posted the differences in the v2.2 file above, you'll just need to match the edits from my screenshots - not that many lines to change ... backup first.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Noel 4,484]

LM listen to everything ... but what you discuss is personal preference and they probably try to avoid getting to involved in that.  They also leave certain doors open to allow for creative 3rd party "ideas".

 

I posted the differences in the v2.2 file above, you'll just need to match the edits from my screenshots - not that many lines to change ... backup first.

 

Cheers, Rob.

I don't think only a minority of users would support what was done to cloud contrast so the 'personal preference' IMO does not apply here, so while they may listen they don't appear to hear.  There have been several threads on this topic.   The sense I got from Zach was that they perhaps thought it was overdone, so in their quest to reduce it they've gone straight past realism and into drab.  I hope they fix it.  Do you believe the HDR file address this very thing, or is it more bloom effects?  I can live with the bloom effects in 2.3 just not the drab cloud shading.

[Guest]

 

 

so while they may listen they don't appear to hear.  There have been several threads on this topic.   The sense I got from Zach was that they perhaps thought it was overdone

 

So Zach's response is LM not hearing?  

 

As stated, I haven't tried v2.2 hdr in v2.4 ... I posted for those that might want to try it.  No harm will result if one tries it.  I personally don't have an issue with v2.4 clouds except for the vertical clouds I see in "some" conditions.

 

However, what I would recommend if this is important to you is to get real world cloud images from various view angles and time of day ... compare those images with what is being presented in P3D v2.4 over the same view angles and time of day.  Then present your information to LM on their forums.

 

As far as minority/majority goes, you'll need to come up with something try to validate your suggestion this is a majority issue ... a user poll may help.

 

No guarantee this will get the results you want, but it's a good start.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Guest]

Here ya go Noel,

 

Some real world cloud shots for you:

 

First 3 shots out in front of my house around 6pm (ish):

 

 

 

 

This last one was around 3:30 pm (while out shopping):

 

 

All shots done on my iPhone with HDR on.  This last one was one of those "wow that's cool" moments -- the aura around the clouds ... probably not going to see something like this simulated in a flight simulator in the near future, but maybe in 5-10 years from now the "masses" will have the type of processing power that can do this real time along with everything else flight related.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Noel 4,484]

I did a low-grade effort at this Rob on the 21st of Oct:  

 

http://www.prepar3d.com/forum-5/?mingleforumaction=viewtopic&t=8777

 

The topic has been brought up and endorsed by others in different threads, but alas, they don't seem to respond in anything but Zach's weak attempt at providing a workaround which doesn't really do anything meaningful, then he tuned back out of the discussion and hasn't returned, hence yes, they don't seem to listen.  My main complaint is that this is not a little thing--it's in your face every time out where clouds are involved, unless it's a low contrast dreary day anyway.

[Guest]

Listen ... or do what you/others desire?  Two VERY different concepts.  LM clearly listened as you've illustrated.  

 

LM may even agree (and I may agree also), but deciding their priorities isn't something you or I do.  There are 100's of thousands of people providing the same type of feedback requests ... some valid, some not, some can wait.  A lot of people do seem to have a hard time understanding and/or accepting that process.

 

I tried to provide you with a way to best present your case.  In the thread you linked, you are probably not presenting the case very well.  You show one picture from middle of the day looking level with a real world clouds and other shot with P3D showing clouds late in the day ... two different times of day.  I see all too often people trying to make the facts fit their conclusions rather than being objective.  In your case posting a picture of a real world cloud at mid day and then posting a picture of P3D cloud in late day or evening is an attempt to make facts fit your conclusion.  All that says to anyone reading your presentation is that you are not being objective.

 

You listed v2.2 clouds as being "nice" ... hence why I've provided the necessary HDR info to go back to v2.2 clouds in v2.4.  I can also provide the differences in the Cloud.fx between 2.2 and 2.4 if you like?

 

Getting into a debate about LM's priorities and listening isn't really going to do much towards your goal.

 

Cheers, Rob.

[Noel 4,484]

Rob, if they can't see the issue even w/ that presentation, PLUS the comments of many others, then it's out of my control and I won't waste any more time on it.  I hope they fix it and I'm 100% certain ALL USERS will notice and appreciate  it.  Nope, not interested in begging for what is clearly quite obvious to myself and many others.  If they can't see it, they aren't looking, don't care or have deprioritized it for the moment.  My sense is they will get back to it because it's so clearly obvious what they have now is a departure from realism, is drab, uninspiring, and likely not that hard to remedy.  Your own photos made the case in spades regarding the drab lack of realism they have implemented.  

 

I've also really lost interest now in every single iteration of P3D as they fix issues and then new ones appear, as w/ the cloud shading issue I'm talking about, poor cloud performance, etc.   This is my choice as a $199 paying customer.   I will tune in to see what each iteration offers from others more interested than myself and willing to install and see what happens, and 'upgrade' when it makes sense to go thru the complete uninstall/reinstall.  If I knew they were going to fix this in 2.5, I'd be patient and go thru the ritual then.  Because they don't acknowledge the issue publicly and their intentions to address it or not, I'm not sure if I should go thru the ritual of uninstall/reinstall of 2.2 which was ultimately superior IMO to 2.3 by a long shot because of this issue.  Nope, didn't waste time w/ 2.4 once I learned they continued to ignore the glaring cloud contrast elephant in the sim.  I'm patient Rob, just wish they would respond to the many users complaining about this so that we can decide what makes sense to do going forward.  But alas, they don't.  Part of my attitude is that I've moved on to a new hobby and this has me less interested in hobbling along w/ incremental changes in P3D.

[CaptCWGAllen 49]

 

 

Nope, not interested in begging for what is clearly quite obvious to myself and many others. If they can't see it, they aren't looking, don't care or have deprioritized it for the moment. My sense is they will get back to it because it's so clearly obvious what they have now is a departure from realism, is drab, uninspiring, and likely not that hard to remedy.

 

I was up flying in a Cherokee yesterday out of Liverpool UK. I loaded up P3D today, used Pilot's FS Global Weather to download exactly the weather at the time I was flying yesterday (it was exactly the same as the METAR reading), fired up REX 4 TD and then set up the sim for the same time of day. Pretty much what you see in the screenshots in this link are what I saw yesterday.

 

The sun is clearly shining on parts of the clouds, there is good contrast. I wouldn't say this is drab at all. I am on V2.3 - didn't see the point of upgrading to 2.4. My FPS is in ranging between 30 - 50 (3 x 27" monitors) and the sim is running smoothly.

 

If you have 3 screen open up the screenshots to full size to get the full effect. I thought it was pretty stunning  - I didn't want to come out of those clouds. Am I the odd one out?

 

http://1drv.ms/1AlBF9a

 

cheers

Peter

[Jazzfan 57]

Impressive screenshots, there Peter. v2.3 certainly holds the edge in cloud colour, and contrast. I may have to revert back to v2.3 myself just for the clouds.

 

  Jazz

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

"I've also really lost interest now in every single iteration of P3D as they fix issues and then new ones appear..."

 

Are you really surprised by this "two steps forward, one step back" progression? I'm not. LM is working with someone else's old code. I'd expect this iterative process to continue to occur until all of the old ACES code has been proofread and/or replaced, which could take several major version upgrades. By that point, P3d will be 64 bit and probably DX12.

[Noel 4,484]

The sun is clearly shining on parts of the clouds, there is good contrast. I wouldn't say this is drab at all.

 

Cloud contrast and sky color reflections were greatly reduced in 2.3 and beyond.  Yes, there is some decent lighting at times but you will never see the sort of scope & range of cloud lighting, contrast, color you see in the real world since 2.3.  Go back to 2.2 or earlier and you will see the difference quite well which is why many people have commented about this very issue.  

"I've also really lost interest now in every single iteration of P3D as they fix issues and then new ones appear..."

 

Are you really surprised by this "two steps forward, one step back" progression? I'm not. LM is working with someone else's old code. I'd expect this iterative process to continue to occur until all of the old ACES code has been proofread and/or replaced, which could take several major version upgrades. By that point, P3d will be 64 bit and probably DX12.

Nope, not surprised at all, just not interested--have at it if that's how you want to spend your time.

 

 

The sun is clearly shining on parts of the clouds, there is good contrast. I wouldn't say this is drab at all.

 

If you want to see much more dynamic cloud lighting and you are going to go thru the time and trouble to revert, go back to 2.2.