9 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

It is a FACT MSFS 2020 has too much green/yellow.  In many cases the roads can have a green tint.  Green fields are often cartoonist and nothing like reality.

The latest UK WU proves correct colours can be produced by default, just look at the area around EGNM (Leeds) which is spectacular 

I am not disagreeing with you here. The colors are all awash in MSFS. I have to change a bunch using the filters.

Speaking of, I really like your settings!

8 minutes ago, Sonosusto said:

You have to edit RAW images the overwhelming majority of the time. Again, you're arguing with something fairly subjective here. Photography is an art. Its not an End-All-Be-All because you said so

Yes and no.  RAW images maintain the highest resolution and allow for lossless editing.  However, sometimes the original RAW requires no editing at all and can be converted to the end format best for its purpose without editing.  The nice thing about the RAW format is I can edit if needed with no loss in quality.

As a professional photographer for 50 years and a professional videographer for 44 years, I would point out that the proper representation is only as accurate as the setting for color temperature.  Daylight is actually "cool" in color temperature, adding blues and greens to the scene.  Artificial light from old tungsten lamps was "warm" in color temp, adding reds and yellows to the scene.

Modern digital cameras can adapt to color temperature on the fly (to a point) but are only accurate if set up properly with a grey card or white card (if white is truly white, then all other colors in the scene will be accurate).

Of course, you may still not like the "natural" image, so you may want to add color shift, increase contrast, etc. until you get the result you want.

2 hours ago, Abriael said:

Here, two more from an observation deck, no window in the way. I'd have thousands to show, all with the same results.

To get the light in MSFS similar to your photos, filters of some sort would need to be used.

7 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

To get the light in MSFS similar to your photos, filters of some sort would need to be used.

Not really. The lighting is very close. I fly exactly from the same airport these pictures are taken at regularly. The difference is minimal. 

Edited September 1, 20241 yr by Abriael

Just now, Abriael said:

Not really. The lighting is very close. 

😁🙄

Just now, MrBitstFlyer said:

😁🙄

Feel free to actually argue your case. Smileys aren't a very solid argument. 

5 hours ago, Abriael said:

This looks like you're looking at it through a blue lens. 

I'm not sure why people think the slight yellow tint is a problem, considering that's what natural sunlight looks like according to physics. 

As someone who dabbles rather heavily in photography, this position honestly baffles me. 

Here's a picture taken with a high quality camera and lens in natural sunlight at 1 PM in June. This is straight JPG conversion from the RAW without any editing whatsoever. The yellow tint is clearly visible because that's how natural sunlight looks filtered by this planet's atmosphere.  

By all means, if you like to watch stuff through a blue filter, more power to you, but REX Atmos and all these manual efforts to remove the "yellow tint" are making the visuals less realistic. 

This pretty much how my sim looks without even using NVIDIA filters. I am on a 77in OLED LG C3. I just use the settings in there with a combination of some simple setting with the regular NCP. Using HDR,

My NCP settings -

Brightness - 60%

Contrast 50%

Gamma 1.00

Dig Vibrance 43%

 

TV Settings -

Brightness - Warm 35

Game Contrast 80

OLED brightness 85

Dynamic tone Mapping - HGiG

Edited September 1, 20241 yr by B777ER

38 minutes ago, Abriael said:

Feel free to actually argue your case.

Likewise. Some of us had made some claims, rebuttals and arguments of our own but you've yet to reply....

2 minutes ago, Sonosusto said:

Likewise. Some of us had made some claims, rebuttals and arguments of our own but you've yet to reply....

"No you're wrong" which is pretty much what your posts translate to, is not much of a rebuttal that I have to bother responding to. 

Just now, Abriael said:

"No you're wrong" which is pretty much what your posts translate to, is not much of a rebuttal that I have to bother responding to. 

Again, likewise. Your previous posts basically dismiss anything I said or others. So again, likewise.

I think a lot of you have good filter ideas above. Some of you are just straight trolling here and its annoying, wanting to argue about everything.

I typically stick with Brightness/contrast and details but I feel like if I do more, I start messing with other things that already look good....

It's all relative (wasn't Einstein a genius?!).

Using the output of a camera as reference isn't really the gold standard. Too many variables, such as the manufacturer's colour science, the time of year, the time of day, pollution factors etc. The list goes on and on.
Now throw each individual monitor into the mix and add to that one's own eyesight and you have a Gordian knot situation.

Bottom line: If you're happy with what you see on your screen then that's the perfect setting for you. Either that or keep tinkering to your heart's content.

12 minutes ago, speedyTC said:

Gordian knot situation

Which can be handled either by acknowledging the complexity or using brute force. I prefer the first approach.

I’ll probably keep tuning the filters a little, although I don’t think nvidia allows for much fine-tuning. And I want to avoid using NCP as it affects all of Windows.

Edited September 1, 20241 yr by Cpt_Piett

6 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

Which can be handled either by acknowledging the complexity or using brute force. I prefer the first approach.

Just to chuck in an extra layer of confusion...have you played around with Reshade? Now that is a truly deep rabbit hole!

2 hours ago, Abriael said:

Feel free to actually argue your case. Smileys aren't a very solid argument. 

How about posting some images from your MSFS 2020 to show how close the colours are?  MSFS is well know for a big variance in realism with its colours & lighting.  Your real world photos are as equally irrelevant as my smilies without seeing your sim to back up your claims.  Show us you use zero filters of any kind or have not adjusted colour settings at all.

I love how real MSFS2020 can look, but I also know how bad it can look!