Adamski_NZ

Generic PTA testing scenario - suggestions please!

Recommended Posts

Again, just to clarify, after 'Restoring the original P3D shaders' (or did you mean 'Set initial parameters for all tweaks'?) did you 'Open' and 'Apply' Adam's 20_10 Preset?

Hi Mike, Before deleting all my PTA folders ( had a few) I reinstall thro pta my original files, however I decided to make sure by reinstating my ShadersHLSL folder from a back-up before reinstalling PTA 2.10 and then applied Adams preset 20_10

 

I was thinking what should we be expecting at around 0700 hrs in NZ and perhaps later on in the day.

I've just been looking at the changes you get by simply having NCP up and just sliding the brightness and contrast slider bars over.

 

bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I was thinking what should we be expecting at around 0700 hrs in NZ and perhaps later on in the day.

 

 

Hi Bob,

 

Quite simply, changes in shadow length and hence overall appearance and lighting of the scene.

 

Regards,

Mike

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike - I'm intrigued. The plot thickens! I'd have thought changing your monitor profile/settings shouldn't have made any difference to the saved image (!!!). Arrrrgh! You are just using the default P3D "V" key and not some other method?

 

I've posted instructions on these benchmarking scenarios on my PTA page (as well as revising the instructions in the archives): http://www.nzfsim.org/index.php?dsp=PTA&scenarios=1#scenarios

 

Also, I uploaded an archive with my main P3D settings (for benchmarking purposes): http://www.nzfsim.org/index.php?dsp=dload&fname=Adam_P3D_settings_PTA.zip

 

@Bob - many thanks. Without closer inspection, your pic looks damn' close to mine :)

 

Adam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike - I'd have thought changing your monitor profile/settings shouldn't have made any difference to the saved image (!!!). Arrrrgh! You are just using the default P3D "V" key and not some other method?

 

Hi Adam,

 

I share your confusion yet, there it is. Some changes have occurred to my captured image following recalibration and are being observed on my monitor and iPad thus implying a positive effect. I'm assuming you are seeing it as well.

 

Yes, I am using the "V" key.

 

I'm pretty sure that the setup prior to image capture remains exactly the same, but will check again carefully to confirm that is indeed the case.

 

We talk about monitor recalibration whereas, in fact, it's the calibration curves of a monitor profile, as generated by the video LUTs of our graphics cards, that are being modified. The monitor has to be reset to its default settings prior to formal recalibration. Perhaps somewhere therein lies the answer to this puzzle. I need to check that Windows7 is handling this properly.

 

Regards,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike - an easy way to test this would be to make a seriously stupid/out of range change in the profile and see how it affects P3D and corresponding screengrab - providing, of course, you keep a backup copy of your *real* profile LOL!

 

Just to check we're on the same page, as it were ... you're talking about the Control Panel where you assign different profiles <?>. I have an sRGB one selected at the moment. I don't think I have a way of editing these profiles - I suppose your calibration software does all that <?>.

 

Adam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Adam,

'Curiouser and curiouser!” Cried Alice or, in this instance, Mike :fool:

Seems I was right about Windows7. I found the following: "Windows7 is the first version of Windows that can load the calibration curves of a monitor profile to the video LUTs without needing to restart the computer. However, Windows 7 is not set up by default to do it."

However, that doesn't explain why the new calibration profile did not load after rebooting with the ColorMunki Calibration Loader running at system startup. Clearly I was wrong in believing it had. Nor does it explain the difference in appearance of my image in post #50 when compared to previous images.

Anyway, I looked into this a bit further and found the following:

Use Windows display calibration was unchecked and greyed out
ORg4OSw.jpg

Use Windows display calibration checked under Color Management - System Defaults
zvZiQQF.jpg

Result
1LjrWR9.jpg

Now I have control and can switch back and forth between ICC Profiles without having to reboot.

The first thing that became apparent was the return of the dark image as soon as I switched to the recently created ColorMunki display calibration profile ROG PG278Q_Easy_D65_201702101603.icm. I took a snap with my iPad:
rM2Gpzc.jpg

I captured another image from P3D in the usual way by using the "V" key and, of course, it appeared very dark as well.
Then I switched to the ASUS PG278Q Color Profile, D6500 and everything brightened up again, including the iPad image, except the latter, as expected, remained darker than the rest.

As you surmised, Adam, what colour information is saved in any particular image and how it is displayed on a monitor are two different things. The former is fixed and determined by the Application software, in this case Prepar3D, whereas the latter can and does influence how each image is displayed and will be influenced by the monitor's active colour calibration profile. The more accurate the calibration curves of a monitor profile are, as generated by the video LUTs of our graphics cards, then the closer will be the displayed image to the original as produced by Prepar3D.

Regards,
Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bob - many thanks. Without closer inspection, your pic looks damn' close to mine :)

Hi Adam,

 

Now, that is interesting because I don't see it that way. To me Bob's appears closer to mine and lighter in appearance. Both our images look on the cold side - yours has a much warmer feel. I've viewed each image on my monitor and iPad and I have the same impression. That said, of the three, I still prefer your image so I wouldn't alter what you are doing. What's more your Presets are producing really great results on my setup, despite some posted images suggesting otherwise, so, purely from a selfish standpoint, I would really hate that to change!

 

I fear our attempts to explain these differences will continue to be frustrated. Perhaps there isn't an answer. As you have suggested in an earlier post, Adam, I think we can rule out Monitor Calibration or the lack thereof. Yes, it will improve the accuracy of colour balance and consequently will affect the way any image is displayed. However, if image 'A' and 'B' appear differently at the outset no amount of monitor recalibration will cause them to match as any shifts will affect each image to the same degree. I think I have confirmed that to be true. Doubtless there are some readers who will be itching to tell us that probably should have been self evident and I was tilting at windmills all along..LOL! Still, I've learned a few things along the way and that is never bad.

 

It now seems clear that the answer does lie elsewhere. Presumably that has to be the origin of the created image: Prepar3D

 

Adjusting HDR values can help, but does have undesirable side-effects, so that's not the way to go. So what is it about our Setups that is different and could possibly be responsible for producing these variances? The mystery deepens ever further!

 

Regards,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike - I agree with your last post. I wonder if we've come to the end of the road in our quest!

 

@felipe ... not sure if I understand your question ... do you mean "what is the solution"?

 

Adam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike - I agree with your last post. I wonder if we've come to the end of the road in our quest!

Yes, thinking can be exhausting and I guess, for the moment, I'm all thunked out..lol! Maybe someday the answer will suddenly appear as our subconscious ruminations continue to churn over the problem...who knows. Or perhaps, amongst our readership, there is one kind and sympathetic soul with a brain the size of a planet who may feel impelled to reveal at least one mystery of our P3D universe 🤓

 

Could it be that the answer is, indeed, 42?

 

Regards,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

m0kz3XA.jpg

 

Mike (SLI)_Generic_Test_02 (Histogram)_.JPG

Pu6m60C.jpg

 

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

o3UEfjM.jpg

 

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

tYryG8f.jpg

 

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

 

Regards,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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: !

 

test_02_histogram_ma.png

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now