Future of p3d ?

[spilok 1,136]

There was a time when I was a little frustrated with the "darker" cockpit while using EA; however, I feel it's still acceptable enough to justify the use of EA without volumetric clouds.  In my opinion, EA is SO much more realistic of real flight than having it turned off.  With EA off, the brightness of the environment, clouds, and cockpit border on somewhat "cartoonish" and fake for me.  I've seen many real flight videos and of course, I've flown all over the world, and EA represents the view of real life flying much better than the alternative.  One can always brighten the cockpit to a degree by using the live graphics option.  For the most part though, the cockpit looks better to me than the overly bright rendition with EA off.

I, too, use a 1080 card and I'm more than pleased with it.  Combined with my LG 32" IPS 4K monitor, and Jetline computer build, I truly do run most settings at full right or close to full and my flights are smooth and wonderfully satisfying.  Maybe it's our individual computer components and builds that make this setting better for some but not for others.

Hopefully, Version 6 will make this issue rather moot.

Stan

[Afterburner 374]

With the help of Envtex, Envshade and Envplus, I have been able to generate a good looking and (in my mind) realistic atmosphere in P3Dv5 with EA off. This may be interesting for those who want to bypass the disadvantages of EA (dark cockpits, flawed sunsets), yet see a realistic atmosphere. I like what I saw on my today's flight over Germany (with ORBX GEN). I use ASP3D for weather:

[Patco Lch 1,465]

@Afterburner That looks impressive with EA off. Would you share your Envplus settings?

[Ray Proudfoot 8,960]

@Afterburner, that ground shot has a bluish cast to my eyes. Similar to photos taken with film cameras that didn’t have a UV filter.

No criticism intended. It just goes to show we all see things differently.

[spilok 1,136]

Agree with Ray on the bluish tint on the ground.  Also, for me, the sky is incredibly, spectacularly BLUE!  Along with the overly bright cockpit, this looks "cartoonish" to me. Again...that's my opinion, folks.  EA turned on, along with its darker elements still looks way more realistic to real flight for me.

[Afterburner 374]

19 hours ago, Patco Lch said:

@Afterburner That looks impressive with EA off. Would you share your Envplus settings?

Sure, here you go:

Envplus settings:

Lowering the "HDR tint" value makes the atmosphere look more blueish, increasing it more greenish.

HDR settings in P3D:

 

In ASP3D, I use a maximum surface visibility of 40mi, and a maximum upper visibility of 200mi.

[Patco Lch 1,465]

@Afterburner Thanks, might give this a try. As far as the stated blueish tint looking toward the ground, from the flight levels you are looking down through five miles of atmosphere. With that in mind, is it not plausible that you might see a blueish tint looking down and even horizontal? I haven't done any real flying in a very long time so I don't know. That question would be more for @Ray Proudfoot and @spilok to consider.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,960]

39 minutes ago, Patco Lch said:

That question would be more for @Ray Proudfoot 

The human eye and brain is very good at filtering out the bluish haze when viewing the ground from altitude. But film isn’t, even with UV filters. I was always disappointed with shots taken from an aircraft at cruise. Too blue! That’s how I see P3D with EA on.

[Afterburner 374]

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@Afterburner, that ground shot has a bluish cast to my eyes. Similar to photos taken with film cameras that didn’t have a UV filter.

No criticism intended. It just goes to show we all see things differently.

Have you flown in the real world lately or viewed a landscape from a high altitude?  If you pay attention to the horizon, you will notice that the tint becomes "bluer" for more distant objects in clear weather. I took a shot of Prague in an afternoon, where you can see that:

Notice that the leaves on the tree and the buildings behind them have vibrant colors, while the objects further out have a blueish tint. And we are talking about altitudes of just 500ft and short distances between 10-20 km.

As you climb up higher, you will see something like this from a typical Boeing cruising altitude. Here is a shot I took myself while flying over the southeast U.S. Note that the visibility is very clear here, yet there is still some haze:

The pictures I showed from my simulator above aren't even that blueish, but a bit more greenish (I set it up to compensate for the more blueish tint during sunset/sunrise). Allow me to compare these pictures with one that you posted on the Active Sky forum when you addressed the banding issue at high altitude:

To me, the environment here looks like there is no atmosphere at all...  As if you are flying through a vacuum. To an extent where it's not clear whether the white patches are clouds or snow on the ground. The ground looks the same whether you fly at 30,000 ft or at Concorde supersonic altitudes. Beauty is obviously in the eye of the beholder, but I don't see any realism in the atmosphere, do you?

[Christopher Low 5,354]

I have the visibility set to 40 miles in P3Dv4.5HF2, and HDR lighting enabled (Brightness and Colour Saturation at 0.80, and Bloom disabled). With REX 4 Texture Direct installed, I have plenty of haze in the background. I also have Volumetric Fog disabled, because it does not work well at Dawn and Dusk with the REX haze (like a thick black band above the horizon).

I have seen quite a few screenshots that seem to show Unlimited visibility with default P3D textures, and I have never understood why anyone would want it like that. No haze at all at altitude looks completely unrealistic.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Christopher Low

[dave2013 1,130]

For me, EA gives a more realistic rendering of the atmosphere, especially at high altitudes.  There is indeed a bluish tint in the atmosphere due to refraction, and frequently a significant amount of haze which EA depicts pretty well.

I use EA on, Vol clouds off, and HDR off.

I also use ENVSHADE and ENVPLUS, which is an improvement over the stock shaders IMO.

This is all subjective, as people have different desires for the appearance of their sim, but if you compare pictures of the real atmosphere to P3D with EA on and EA off, it is pretty evident that EA on looks more like the real thing.

Dave

[Garys 209]

49 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

I use EA on, Vol clouds off, and HDR off.

I use the same settings as well. My only gripe with EA on is that there is too much light scattering or haze close to the aircraft. to me It looks like I"m looking down on a constant layer of very light fog. If anyone knows how push that out so that the first 10-20 miles is clear and then gradually increases into the distance let me know.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,960]

1 hour ago, Afterburner said:

Allow me to compare these pictures with one that you posted on the Active Sky forum when you addressed the banding issue at high altitude:

That screenshot was to demonstrate the banding. Nothing else. Visibility in AS was set to unlimited. That wasn’t my normal setting.

Bob posted how to fix the banding. I implemented it. AS visibility was set to max minus 1 mile which generates realistic haze. I’m happy with the results.

[newtie 533]

13 hours ago, Afterburner said:

Sure, here you go:

Envplus settings:

Lowering the "HDR tint" value makes the atmosphere look more blueish, increasing it more greenish.

HDR settings in P3D:

In ASP3D, I use a maximum surface visibility of 40mi, and a maximum upper visibility of 200mi.

Hey Afterburner,

What are the min-max limits i(x.xx - x.xx) in ENVPlus? From your screenshot, 1 appears to be default?

Edited April 11, 2023 by Ray Proudfoot
Images in quoted reply removed.

[Afterburner 374]

9 hours ago, newtie said:

Hey Afterburner,

What are the min-max limits i(x.xx - x.xx) in ENVPlus? From your screenshot, 1 appears to be default?

I don't know of any official limits in Envplus. It looks like it's open-ended. The default value is indeed 1.0.