As far as I am aware Gen 4 shadows are what you get if you tick the EZDOK compatibility setting in the shadow dialog as shown by Glynn above but I will check the code more carefully. The problem with EzDok/TrackIR is that they hook into the FSX runtime and adjust the projection matrices. In Gen 5 I introduced a (small) adjustment to the matrices in the shaders to correct for a projection error that seems to always exist in FSX. This change conflicts with Ezdok.

Riccardo - do you have any shadow options set in the Legacy dialog?

 

As I recall your main Shadow dialog settings were identical to Glynn's

Steve those are my settings in Legacy dialog:

 

 

 

Sorry but what I don't understand is which GEN of shadows we have to use along with trackIR. Whit GEN 4 in debug dialog now shadows are corrects, have I to change GEN if something is wrong in Legacy dialog?

Here are my Legacy settings

 

Riccardo you really should not leave those legacy shadow option set if flying a FS9 or FSX aircraft, they can cause shadow issues and may impact performance. I doubt they would cause moving shadows though. You may well certainly see false moving shadows on scenery if you fly to a legacy airport with those settings.

 

The idea is that if you want to fly an old freeware aircraft you load a profile with those settings set and then switch to a normal profile when you gave finished the flight.

ok so the current situation is

 

Glynn

 

Ezdok 1.1.7.0

 

TrackIR 5 running on TrackIR 4.2 build 39 software with TrueView turned off (very important with Ezdok)

 

No legacy shadowing features (good)

 

Works fine with Ezdok compatibility setting enabled.

 

 

Riccardo

 

Ezdok 1.18.5 beta and TrackIR is 5.2.200 build 14548

 

Legacy Shadowing enabled (bad)

 

Works fine with ShadowGeneration set to 4 BUT not with Ezdok compatibility flag.

Steve I turned off legacy shadow and TrueView in TrackIR and with GEN 6 NGX works fine now, only MD11 has a little issue (shadows move with eyepoint, but less then before).

Riccardo great thanks for posting that, it's really useful. For now I will add some warnings to the legacy screen and investigate further.

 

Hopefully the shadows are worth it at the end of the day.

Hopefully the shadows are worth it at the end of the day.

 

Hi Steve, a little OT, but have you looked at the possibility of implementing cloud to ground shadows in DX10? We know it is possible, because the folks at REX has acheived it back in 2009, but they ran into a number of hurdles, that they just abandoned the project. So I thought, with your knowledge of the Shaders, that probably wasn't known then, it may still be possible. I know it's a long shot, but heah

 

Thanks

Steve, another little OT, remeber when we were talking about of shadows moving with eyepoint, not only in the NGX but also in MD11? look at these screen and the nose of the aircraft, can these strange shadows cause the issue and are they related with the Fixer?

 

 

This is the second one:

 

Occasionally someone posts picture like that.

 

What I immediately ask for is a set of photos showing a stock aircraft in exactly the same position with and without ezdok and with and without the fixer.

 

So if you ever see it save the flight and take a series of photos.

 

I need to determine if its an issue with the aircraft model.

 

Does that shadow move with eyepoint?

 

Do you have shadow boost turned on - if so disable it and see what it looks like.

 

Does it go away if you disable HD shadows?

 

Make sure that the legacy shadow settings are off of course as they will cause major issues.

 

Also can you create a new thread for this?

Thanks for reply Steve. All legacy shadows are turned off.

 

 

 

Does that shadow move with eyepoint?

 

No, I think not. But these shadows are not present at cruise level, appearing just before the touchdown

 

 

 

Do you have shadow boost turned on - if so disable it and see what it looks like.

 

Yes it was, I'll try to verify if it goes away turning off

 

 

 

Does it go away if you disable HD shadows?

 

Same as above

 

 

 

Also can you create a new thread for this?

 

No, you are right. I'm sorry, told was an OT.