4 minutes ago, Murmur said:

Still not perfect, just a little better.

My bet is that we won't get 'perfect' until everyone has HDR microLED monitors with max brightness capabilities that force our retinas to contract. Until then, approximations and models will rule the day.

I'll take LR's photometric renderer any day. When looking at views that don't have big regions of big dynamic range variation, the lighting looks just right. Counting those photons, one by one....

22 minutes ago, Murmur said:

In the meantime, while LR works to improve the issue, I found a workaround by setting art control dataref "autoexposure/null_lo" to -1 (from default 1, I think).

Still not perfect, but a little better. Some people might think the external world is somewhat overexposed, but I find it more realistic than default, also in terms of brightness.

 

 

That head tracking Bjoern posted in

On 2/28/2023 at 7:41 PM, Bjoern said:

Or use face tracking with a standard webcam. https://github.com/AIRLegend/aitrack

possibly a better alternative.

XP11 demo, but looks solid, and 6DOF to boot.

 

Edited March 2, 20233 yr by mSparks

4 hours ago, 2reds2whites said:

What lmao? No it's not. It's only realistic if your eyes were made of cameras and their associated dynamic range.

To say it's 100% realistic is absolutely laughable.

It was semi sarcasm. Do you see me mentioning anything is 100% in any discussion?

Lighten up. Context is everything.  
 

🤦‍♂️

Perhaps we can get back on topic, after getting derailed, again, by someone who doesn’t understand sarcasm. 

Edited March 2, 20233 yr by GoranM

1 hour ago, Murmur said:

Still not perfect, but a little better. Some people might think the external world is somewhat overexposed, but I find it more realistic than default, also in terms of brightness.

Indeed the panel is a bit 'improved.
Too bad, however, that the scenario is overexposed.
But I admire your creative effort in trying to solve the problem of dark panels. 👍

As I have explained many times on many topics, the problem lies above all in the shadows, Xplane generates too black shadows.
I'll show you what happens with photoshop camera raw.
I used your nice picture...

.... I imported it in camera raw changing only the shadows parameter...

... et voilà, dark panel bug fixed without touching the photometric light or sky exposure.

As you see, XPlane's bug resides only in the shadows.
That is well known news!
This bug already existed in year 2017 in XP11. 
And I'm not talking about a "partially similar" bug, but exactly the same 100% precise bug, always caused by ... shadows. 😣

I invite you to read the two pages of this old topic in which we spoke (with irrefutable evidence) of the dark panels generated by the Xplane lighting/shadow engine bug.
https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/122225-very-dark-cockpits/&
That old topic is also interesting from a photographic point of view, because there are photos of panels that have dark shadows identical to XP12 panels (on page 2 there is also my temporary solution to fix bug).

My hardware doesn't allow me to manipulate XP12.
But your hardware I assume yes.
Perhaps by reading that old topic and the solutions written there, you can try to fix the XP12 bug by acting on the shadow codes, not on exposure or light.
You have to be able (how I don't know) to get rid of the shadows, or find a way to make them less black.
Waiting for Laminar to fix the bug, you don't have many other alternatives.
The problem is the shadows.
Experiment on them and show us the results, they could be valuable for users. 

(As I said, unfortunately my hardware doesn't allow me to manipulate XP12. If I do, the magenta bug appears and the sim crashes)

 

 

5 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Indeed the panel is a bit 'improved.
 

snipped

It's funny you should mention the bug exists from 2017, when XP12 is using an entirely new lighting engine.

If you had some kind test, using a photometer, and were able to publish your findings in some kind of essay format, comparing X-Plane 12 lighting, to X-Plane 11 lighting, and real world lighting, we can have an in depth discussion.

I'm afraid, without such a test, your entire point is moot.  All you have now, is an opinion.

Can we please stop derailing the thread?  If you want to discuss lighting, start another thread.

21 hours ago, mSparks said:

That head tracking Bjoern posted in

possibly a better alternative.

...

XP11 demo, but looks solid, and 6DOF to boot.

It's really solid. I'm using it in rather low level light environments and with (rimless) glasses and the tracker still works just fine and much better than the Aruco paper tracker I used to use. As Opentrack does all the rest, I have headtracking in XP, DCS, IL-2, BMS and heck, even in Tiny Combat Arena! All on Linux to boot. Wholeheartedly recommended for those days on which you don't want to put on your VR gear.

Edited March 3, 20233 yr by Bjoern

2 hours ago, Paulvanuf said:

I was looking into this topic to find arguments to come back to xp12, but found no reason thusfar. Please help?

Download the XP12 demo and play around in it and see if you like it. Zero cost, zero risk.

I own xp12, but was hoping to learn from others and their experiences, things that are new. I am not thát knowledgeable/experienced…

2 hours ago, Bjoern said:

I was looking into this topic to find arguments to come back to xp12, but found no reason thusfar. Please help?

That's very confusing.  Were you using / trying XP12 at one point?  If not, as @Bjoern suggests, try the demo.  Personal preference is well, personal.  If you like something (or don't) it shouldn't matter what others "argue".
 

Hi @Paulvanuf.  Ah, now I understand.  But I still think it's personal preference.  Certainly, XP12 has improved over the months it's been out.  I'm enjoying using it and watching it evolve.  Can't speak for you, though.

There really is nothing like flying in X-Plane.  I agree with the OP completely.  In X-Plane 11 and 12, all the aircraft default or 3rd party, feel alive in a way that most planes in P3D or MSFS just don't due to X-Plane's unique, super realistic flight modeling.  Don't get me wrong, it's not perfect like any other sim but there is nothing else like that compares to that X-Plane feeling for sure.

8 hours ago, Kalnon said:

There really is nothing like flying in X-Plane.  I agree with the OP completely.  In X-Plane 11 and 12, all the aircraft default or 3rd party, feel alive in a way that most planes in P3D or MSFS just don't due to X-Plane's unique, super realistic flight modeling.  Don't get me wrong, it's not perfect like any other sim but there is nothing else like that compares to that X-Plane feeling for sure.

I agree and I add to the list of "feel of flight" sims IL-2 Great Battles and DCS World (some modules) as well as Aerowinx PSX for the 744 specifically...

But XP12 has, for me, just as you point out, the power of retaining the main flight and even ground handling and overall physics characteristics of most aircraft types.

I just wanted gliders to feel a bit better and I would be in my beach 🙂

Edited March 6, 20233 yr by cagarini

15 minutes ago, cagarini said:

I agree and I add to the list of feel of flight" sims IL-2 Great Battles and DCS World (some modules) as well as Aerowinx PSX for the 744 specifically...

But XP12 has, for me, just as you point out, the power of retaining the main flight and even ground handling and overall physics characteristics of most aircraft types.

I just wanted gliders to feel a bit better and I would be in my beach 🙂

And I agree that for combat simulators, IL-2 Sturmovik: Great Battles is amazing and my absolute favorite because I have a great love for WWII and WWI aircraft. The feeling of flight in that sim is similar to how X-Plane aircraft feel. DCS World is great too, I use them both 😁

2 hours ago, turbomax said:

but have you tried flights around 5:00 - 6:00 p.m. the pitch black clouds that look like from burning oil refineries put me off, every time.

Maybe they look a bit too dark for a few minutes during twilight, but I don't think they're as bad as you say:

VS

 

VS

 

1 hour ago, Murmur said:

I don't think they're as bad as you say:

even worse: