StuSpeed

Do a search for o4xp_2_xp12 at the org for a simple script to update TE sceneries with xp12 seasons and soundscapes.

Seems to be his professional opinion that in using a simulator and moving around the views as he would scan in RL, finds that the instruments get too dark when any of the outside is in view- I surmise as compared to his muscle memory perception in RL. This is the "reality" LR should strive for and I think are making progress in doing.

You are making your argument based on VR + eye tracking presuming you are focusing outside when the outside and cockpit panel are both in view on the monitor. I keep a fixed cockpit view on my monitor much of the time and scan the outside view and inside panels. Without eye tracking, the monitor cannot make the real-time brain/eye adjustments to change the lighting levels as we experience in real life. So a "tone mapping" that brings more of the outside and inside view to what we experience over a scan (rather than point in view time) is more realistic in my estimation.

The argument is about how to most realistically project a high dynamic range lighting scenario to a monitor. This would naturally mean whatever "correct" projection is produced, would use the full dynamic range of the monitor. Presuming that the screen capture was taken from a decently calibrated monitor, to have gaps in the histogram means that even the limited dynamic range of a monitor is not being fully utilized- that is what can't be correct. Absolutely agree the darkness/washout should vary depending on outside vs inside. As I updated in my prev post right when you responding, I don't see a "camera shot" as derogatory but rather as a fair representation of what the eye/brain can actually perceive in RL in real-time.

I am not advocating any change to the lighting model but to me the "camera shot" is an ok compromise given the limits of a monitor. The pupil captures more dynamic range than a monitor outputs in all cases outside of staring directly at the sun (pitch dark you will still perceive "brilliant darkness"). To not make use of the full dynamics of the monitor darks cannot be considered a correct representation of a virtual cockpit.

@efis007 has gone quite a field but his histogram analysis is on point. I've edited a lot of pictures in my time and there is almost never a valid reason to compress the darks (no part of the image using the darkest dark) when any image is already limited in dynamic range. The adjusted cockpit image looks way better and shows to me there is nothing necessarily wrong with the LR lighting model, just a problem projecting the lighting model in an optimal manner (using maximum dynamic range available) to the monitor.