EA : rounded clouds horizon and weird haze

[Nemo 1,304]

2 hours ago, mpo910 said:

They should not stop improvements indeed. 

I saw many many issues....really a lot...during whole BETA phase and even after roll out. But I must admit I have to agree on some topics here:

- Waffle clouds at some conditions (more different cloud models needed and mix them up)

- Less pixelated clouds (at dawn and dusk especially)!

- Blending fog, haze with clouds or smooth visual transitions between non, haze, fog clouds

- BETTER LIGHTING (Not lightning) Single light source depending scattering and colorization (sun = strong.....going away from sun looses light power and less dense colors

- More Thunderstorm like clouds. More models needed to mix them up

- Terrain / Cloud rendering view Bug (cloud in front of terrain for instance)

- And transitions between weather updates

I think this are the huge topics. I get it. We will keep going ahead on pushing this

But we BETA users are equally depending on LM as you all are too.

Marcus

Don't you think that some of the above issues could be addressed by ActiveSkyP3D?

[GSalden 4,654]

6 minutes ago, Nemo said:

Don't you think that some of the above issues could be addressed by ActiveSkyP3D?

For v5.1 AS was able to control the VolumetricClouds settings but for v5.2 this does not work (yet)…,

[Biology 1,347]

11 hours ago, mikeymike said:

I am

 very pleased with performance with 5.2 non EA used with asca HDR off  the only issue I have is the  white haze in Horizon Not sure if it’s asp3d or P3d ?

im sure it’ll be fixed in a hotfix 

cheers 

mike

You have to have HDR enabled with EA, it is forced for a reason - atmospheric scattering calculations produce brightness values above SDR, so anything above SDR will be clipped to white.

[mpo910 2,112]

1 hour ago, Nemo said:

Don't you think that some of the above issues could be addressed by ActiveSkyP3D?

Some yes. Of course. If HiFi is willing to change this, what I assume that they are working on this, yes.

But I want the core sim to deliver as much as possible "out of the box" cloud models/shapes. The different cloud models/shapes like Cumulus, cumulunimbus, etc. is not 3th party but basic truesky.  P3D should deliver the best midrange basic settings, so 3th party can use this to "create" the weather.

This is not 3th party:

- Partly 3th Party and partly P3D: Waffle clouds at some conditions (more different cloud models needed and mix them up)

- Blending fog, haze with clouds or smooth visual transitions between non, haze, fog clouds

- BETTER LIGHTING (Not lightning) Single light source depending scattering and colorization (sun = strong.....going away from sun looses light power and less dense colors

- More Thunderstorm like clouds. More models needed to mix them up

- Terrain / Cloud rendering view Bug (cloud in front of terrain for instance)

Edited June 12, 2021 by mpo910

[mpo910 2,112]

58 minutes ago, GSalden said:

For v5.1 AS was able to control the VolumetricClouds settings but for v5.2 this does not work (yet)…,

HiFi is working on this. To many changes within P3D have made them decide to temp turn this off as changes have to be done by HiFi.

 

Edited June 12, 2021 by mpo910

[mpo910 2,112]

These Sceenshots I´ve made while using @GSalden his recently posted volumetriclouds.cfg and I find it really excellent work he did!

I know how many hours it takes to change and tests in small incremental steps.

I will do some further testing to make sure, visuals and performance are in balance (this seems to be the case with this cfg. file).

But you have to try this to see what P3D is already capable of. I will further proceed pushing LM to do further changes to get more realistic and different models so we get much better variations up in the sky (See my earlier posts this morning).

But please test GSalden his file and post feedback here! 

Some shots:

[Biology 1,347]

11 hours ago, kand said:

Hmm @BiologicalNanobot , If the truesky shaders are fully available in P3D, why would LM say this scene is not possible, any idea why this doesn't stack up?

It is because those scenes are hand-made, which is simply not possible for a flight simulator. As many other applications are only meant to be viewed from ground or low altitudes and not from FL380, it is possible to hand-place clouds for best visuals. However, the same is not the case for a flight simulator with fully dynamic weather - local cloud coverage, heights, etc. all have to be procedurally generated using noise or injected by a third-party weather add-on.

Here are a few videos of trueSKY running in completely procedural mode:

 

You will notice that these don't look much different than what P3D already looks like.

4 hours ago, GSalden said:

No improvements on the clouds in almost a year and now the possibility to use 2D clouds with EA gives me the feeling that further TrueSky cloud development is not a big priority or perhaps not even possible by the way P3D has been build.

While I understand your concerns, trueSKY is quite limited when clouds are generated entirely procedurally, so there isn't much LM can do, other than giving third party weather add-on developers the ability to "author" clouds with dynamic weather maps. If LM gives an ability to do that, cloud fidelity will increase drastically. @Damian Clark do you have any thoughts on that?

It also has nothing to do with the way P3D has been built. Simul trueSKY is software-agnostic, so it can run in any environment.

Lastly, even how cloud layers are placed have a drastic effect on visuals. Here are a few screenshots, I hand-placed cloud layers based on METAR to make them look the best:

This is v5.1 HF1 and v5.2 clouds look even better. EA has an immense potential already, and it will get even better once LM gives third-party weather add-ons the ability to inject their weather maps.

Edited June 12, 2021 by BiologicalNanobot

[Alti 63]

hi, its hard to say, but i do not want to use these EA-Clouds.
i have dane complete reinstall 5.2, so no old files can create this.

my setting is: one cloud layer, from 2500 to 50000 ft. Thunderstorm Density broken.   
volumetric clouds: ultra. no edited cfg.

Edited June 12, 2021 by Alti

[mpo910 2,112]

Two shots with GSalden his profile:

FL 400

Volumetricclouds slider at MEDIUM

3 layers OC 1st Picture

2 layer OC 2nd picture

No more waffles

[mpo910 2,112]

1 hour ago, Alti said:

hi, its hard to say, but i don not want to use these EA-Clouds.
i have dane complete reinstall 5.2, so no old files can create this.

my setting is: one cloud layer, from 2500 to 50000 ft. Thunderstorm Density broken.   
volumetric clouds: ultra. no edited cfg.

 

Use GSalden his his profile! See the results in my pictures.

I have LM informed about my findings and we have to wait for their reply (weekend).

Please read carefully!

12th Jun 2021 12:00 AM (German time): 

• As I see this, at the moment and without having a feedback from LM yet, there are some missing lines in the config. At least this COULD be the PARTLY the cause some of you are having strange looking clouds!
• I´ve informed LM about this and will provide you feedback as soon as I know if my assumptions are correct or not.

12th Jun 2021  01:47 PM (German time):

• LM has confirmed that the volumetriccloud.cfg is correct and the changes are also correct!

Conclusion: Gerards changes have a positive influence on the overall look of clouds. 

Give it a shot and report back what you find from it then.

Marcus 

Edited June 12, 2021 by mpo910

[SAS443 1,711]

So disappointed in the clouds.

Still a hodge-podge of unrealistic messy pixels.

But I commend LM for fixing the colors in dawn/dusk. That was a nice addition!...however looks like we have to settle for an underwhelming sky scape going forward. 

One of the true sensations of real flying is cruising along a fair weather CU cloud scape. It never gets old. Never.

[Alti 63]

15 minutes ago, mpo910 said:

I´ve found some issues (maybe faulty and missing lines) within the volumetricclouds.cfg file delivered by LM which are possible the cause for these looking terrible clouds!

Use GSalden his his profile! See the results in my pictures.

I have LM informed about my findings and we have to wait for their reply (weekend).

Give it a shot and report back what you find from it then.

Marcus 

Hi, its "better" now, but i am getting hammered in frames.

[mpo910 2,112]

7 minutes ago, Alti said:

Hi, its "better" now, but i am getting hammered in frames.

HAve you resolution to medium or high? Try medium if not.

Because GSalden has NOT changed the resolution. 

Edited June 12, 2021 by mpo910

[Alti 63]

medium is much much much different (better)  in frames. i will stay on Medium, the pic was in Ultra. the clouds looks near the same in medium.

thanks to GSalden. Good work.

[mpo910 2,112]

Please read this:

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/601741-important-if-you-are-having-terrible-looking-clouds-ea-mode/