4 minutes ago, Noel said:

OMG, thanks for that!  Clickspots are not misaligned when you turn off Lens Correction 

You’re welcome 👀

2 hours ago, rayharris108 said:

No this happened since SU7 - my click spots are somewhat to the left of buttons and switches.

Ray, I just learned turning Lens Correction OFF fixes the misaligned click spots FYI 

2 hours ago, Krakin said:

Isn't it about how our eyes and cameras adjust to quickly going from looking at something bright to dark? It also simulates how washed out bright scenery looks outside the cockpit when focusing your view on the panel.

You just described 'Eye Adaptation', only available to turn on and off from the user config file at the moment.

2 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

You just described 'Eye Adaptation', only available to turn on and off from the user config file at the moment.

One aspect of the sim that does surprise me is the presence of settings within the config file, such as eye adaptation and film grain, that are not yet options within the simulator settings screen. I do find that strange. Things like film grain are usually user controllable within the software. It almost suggests they were meant to be options, or they're planned to be -- but then I don't see why they wouldn't have implemented toggles already.

22 minutes ago, March Hare said:

One aspect of the sim that does surprise me is the presence of settings within the config file, such as eye adaptation and film grain, that are not yet options within the simulator settings screen. I do find that strange. Things like film grain are usually user controllable within the software. It almost suggests they were meant to be options, or they're planned to be -- but then I don't see why they wouldn't have implemented toggles already.

Yes, an eye adaptation toggle would be nice, as some people don't like it, and a gamma slider would be good as well. 

Plus, they could do with making some of the ranges bigger on the sliders.  I have shadows set at 8196 in the config file and they look really sharp in the cockpit.  Maybe only good for people with 3080 and upwards graphics cards, but there are a few of them now, and it will only become more.  

Edited December 7, 20214 yr by bobcat999

2 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

I have shadows set at 8196 in the config file and they look really sharp in the cockpit.

How do you do this? Does it get rid of the jaggy edges? 

2 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

How do you do this? Does it get rid of the jaggy edges? 

Yes, 99% are dead sharp for me after this. The only ones that aren't still have a feathered edge for some reason. But I don't see many of them, and I think that is more of a rendering engine problem in the sim. 

If you know where your user config file is ( UserCfg.opt ) open it in notepad and scroll down to shadows. Alter size to 8196.  Easy to put back if you don't like it, but please make a backup copy of the file first in case you lose your formatting! 

There is a separate section for VR shadows further down as well.

If you get a performance hit, try 4096 instead (even my old 1080Ti could handle this alright). 4096 is nearly as good, just a bit softer. 

Although it will show your new setting in the sim on the settings page, any movement of the slider will put you back to the in sim maximum again (2048 I think) so you will need to re-edit the file again afterwards. 

I find it a profound change in the appearance. 

I just checked, and mine are set on 6144 now as a good balance between appearance and performance. That is on a 3080Ti at 4k holding about 45 fps  - Nvidia Gsync on Freesync ultra monitor now, a much better experience as well 🙂. 

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by bobcat999

2 hours ago, Ianrivaldosmith said:

How do you do this? Does it get rid of the jaggy edges? 

Check this one out:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/better-shadows/479741

23 hours ago, March Hare said:

Could be that Asobo were messing with data on the server at that time. Either way, frustration/anger aimed at a beta build is misplaced; the aim of it is to detect issues, so report it via the official forum, in the correct area, following the guidelines, and include all flight information you can think of (as well as your PC details).

I have done all that.  I think I'm still allowed to discuss it here.

11 hours ago, March Hare said:

One aspect of the sim that does surprise me is the presence of settings within the config file, such as eye adaptation and film grain, that are not yet options within the simulator settings screen. I do find that strange. Things like film grain are usually user controllable within the software. It almost suggests they were meant to be options, or they're planned to be -- but then I don't see why they wouldn't have implemented toggles already.

I've found this is just a software development thing with games, they have so many options and some are "new" and untested that they're hidden in ini/cfg files and sometime later added to the UI. Some Devs leave them out of the UI altogether do that is just the Power Users that discover and use them.

10 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

Yes, an eye adaptation toggle would be nice, as some people don't like it,

Eye adaptation is ridiculously exaggerated as seen on my screen. Typically what a French would « une fausse bonne idée ». I would settle for the usercfg file switch to work. It does not do anything for me. 

6 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

Yes, 99% are dead sharp for me after this.

I can confirm 🙂

I also noticed that in the new beta, scenery and clouds do not look grainy even with sharpen and film grain on 1.

What a difference that color depth bug made, and they left us with that for 5 months! 

1 hour ago, JDWalley said:

I have done all that.  I think I'm still allowed to discuss it here.

Of course you are. I haven't said you can't discuss things. I'm not that kind of person. I was simply highlighting that when opting into a beta test, you are choosing to download an unfinished build that is guaranteed to have issues, and you've committed to identifying them, so it seems illogical (to me) to be frustrated by it. Using angry emoticons implies that you expected a stable release version that was promised to permanently fix everything for you, which it wasn't.

They will issue the beta test build knowing some things aren't fixed yet within that build, or expecting that they might not be fixed for everyone, because it's partly a data gathering exercise for the development team, so they can trace the cause of bugs by analysing  who is experiencing the issues, whether some people aren't and others are, what are the differences in user hardware, mods, or even in-sim settings and flight conditions. E.g. does this only happen in X part of the world, at Y time of day?

When I've done testing in the past, I've gone into it looking for problems and even tried to do things the software isn't supposed to do. So, it was a good experience, to me, if I did find problems and could report them with detailed information, because I had a sense that I was making a meaningful contribution. I quite enjoyed it when I found something wrong, knowing the general user base would eventually get a better product as a result.

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by March Hare

14 hours ago, March Hare said:

Of course you are. I haven't said you can't discuss things. I'm not that kind of person. I was simply highlighting that when opting into a beta test, you are choosing to download an unfinished build that is guaranteed to have issues, and you've committed to identifying them, so it seems illogical (to me) to be frustrated by it. Using angry emoticons implies that you expected a stable release version that was promised to permanently fix everything for you, which it wasn't.

They will issue the beta test build knowing some things aren't fixed yet within that build, or expecting that they might not be fixed for everyone, because it's partly a data gathering exercise for the development team, so they can trace the cause of bugs by analysing  who is experiencing the issues, whether some people aren't and others are, what are the differences in user hardware, mods, or even in-sim settings and flight conditions. E.g. does this only happen in X part of the world, at Y time of day?

When I've done testing in the past, I've gone into it looking for problems and even tried to do things the software isn't supposed to do. So, it was a good experience, to me, if I did find problems and could report them with detailed information, because I had a sense that I was making a meaningful contribution. I quite enjoyed it when I found something wrong, knowing the general user base would eventually get a better product as a result.

I see your point, but I suspect you misunderstand mine.  Initially, and this was before the beta's release, the problems with low clouds appeared to have been resolved, at least in my area, and several of us here agreed that it appeared to have been a server-side fix, since all of us were still running SU7.  Then, within a day, the problem returned, and people who were not in the beta noted it.  After installing the beta, I checked again, and found that what they were reporting was the case, that the clouds on the ground were back.  What we were all reacting to had nothing, as far as I can tell, to do with the beta version itself, but to adjustments being made on the server, and affecting players whether they were using the beta or not.  If I was using "angry emoticons," it was because I saw a problem that we thought Asobo had just fixed reappear, apparently due to server-side tweaks.

I should add that the problem seems to have cleared up (no pun intended) in at least parts of the world since then, but I did uncover a similar problem (which I also reported on the official forums), which is that rain is so excessive that it appears as a heavy fog/mist everywhere.  For example, here is a shot from LSGG this morning.  Although the METAR indicates rain, it also lists 10KM+ of visibility, which is definitely not the case here:

Edited December 8, 20214 yr by JDWalley