48 minutes ago, mSparks said:

Round my way, learning new things isn't an insult.. we save that kind of mindset for the western staff.

congratulations on learning how a 748 cockpit is lit

(credit:Janov)

This is too perfect. I must be reading that wrong. Is that 1000 lux?

Did you just attempt to make a point of how dark a flight deck is, with the ambient light meter at the darkest part of the cockpit, with the lumisphere facing rearwards - showing an ambient illuminance of 1000lux? 

1000 lux...........https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/light-level-rooms-d_708.html

SURELY I must be misreading the value on that monitor, otherwise you've just obliterated your own argument lmao. 1000 lux is the lighting in an operating theatre.

48 minutes ago, mSparks said:

which do you think looks more real?

or

 

On a sunny day? The top one, by a massive margin. I've never flown the 747 but have spent plenty of time on the jumpseat. Even the sim isn't as dark as the lower image lol.

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by 2reds2whites

57 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

Agreed, XP11’s cockpit lighting looks better in these shots.

Lighting is great in the cockpit, but the lighting is excessive for the scene its in, looks 'stuck over' the outside scene.  Looks over processed in an HDR kind of way - horrible!

20 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

SURELY I must be misreading the value on that monitor, otherwise you've just won the opposite argument to what you're trying to make lmao. 1000 lux is the lighting in an operating theatre.

you are surely missing the 107,527 lux out the window and the ~500 lux your monitor can output.

20 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

The top one, by a massive margin

without the eye adaptation, the scenery is now a little.... white..

 

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by mSparks

58 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Lighting is great in the cockpit, but the lighting is excessive for the scene its in, looks 'stuck over' the outside scene.  Looks over processed in an HDR kind of way - horrible!

Nope.

40 minutes ago, mSparks said:

you are surely missing the 107,527 lux out the window and the ~500 lux your monitor can output.

This is another nonsense argument. It is not necessary for a screen to output the same amount of light as the sun to simulate sunlight, or plausible shadows, or a feeling of discomfort when looking directly at the sun.

Other sims do it fine.

9 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

Nope.

provably so.

5 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

. It is not necessary for a screen to output the same amount of light as the sun to simulate sunlight,

indeed, but the relationship needs to be more or less maintained.

so if 100,000 real lux = 500 stimulated lux, best case

how many stimulated lux is 1,000 real lux, best case?

I make it somewhere less than looking like twilight.

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by mSparks

6 minutes ago, scotchegg said:

This is another nonsense argument. It is not necessary for a screen to output the same amount of light as the sun to simulate sunlight, or plausible shadows, or a feeling of discomfort when looking directly at the sun.

Other sims do it fine.

Including XP11 and every other X-plane release. I legitimately have no idea what he's talking about. 

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by 2reds2whites

2 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

I legitimately have no idea what he's talking about. 

https://developer.x-plane.com/2021/11/photometric-lighting-what-is-it-and-why-do-we-need-it/

12 minutes ago, mSparks said:

provably so.

indeed, but the relationship needs to be more or less maintained.

Why?

Is this the basis of your opinion? 

Why on earth would that relationship need to be 'maintained?' 

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by 2reds2whites

4 hours ago, 2reds2whites said:

Except he's talking about the flight deck illumination, which is far closer to reality than what XP12 has to offer. Simple as that.

I know exactly what he’s talking about. Your condescending attitude shines through, as always. Along with your opinion. 
example:
 

4 hours ago, 2reds2whites said:

Source: spend lots of time in a flight deck.

 

The more you post, the more I feel like I’m engaged in an argument with an word not allowed child or an arrogant adult. 
Blocked. 

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by GoranM

3 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

Why?

Is this the basis of your opinion? 

Why on earth would that relationship need to be 'maintained?' 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_(vision)

2 minutes ago, mSparks said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contrast_(vision)

Literally the third line of your explanatory link;

Quote

The human visual system is more sensitive to contrast than absolute luminance; we can perceive the world similarly regardless of the huge changes in illumination over the day or from place to place.

So your answer as to why we need to maintain the luminance ratio is to post a link in which it explicitly states that a constant luminance ratio is completely irrelevant in how we perceive the world. 

This shortly after your post about how dark a 747 flight deck is actually proves it's as bright as an operating theatre. 

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by 2reds2whites

6 minutes ago, 2reds2whites said:

constant luminance ration is completely irrelevant in how we perceive the world. 

yep, dark cockpits dont matter much to our visual perception. well done, that was quick and easy.

Edited March 18, 20233 yr by mSparks

1 hour ago, mSparks said:

yep, dark cockpits dont matter much to our visual perception. well done, that was quick and easy.

Lol, even by your usually arcane standards of logic, this one is a real doozy🤩 #undistributedmiddles

On 3/18/2023 at 6:17 AM, brinx said:

Can't see an end in sight, I guess.

need some light at the end of the tunnel. 😁

pun intended.

It’s a very illuminating discussion👍🏻