In fact, I’m pretty convinced the only reason these features are implemented is because they look “cool”. They’re not inevitable. Someone thinks they’re nice, that’s why they’re there.
1 Like
Eyes don’t have depth of field now?
Well the depth of field implemented here is that of a telephoto lens, not that of a human eye.
1 Like
There’s a very obvious reason why you can’t easily simulate visual depth of field on a computer monitor.
People really shouldn’t get hung up on this whole eye/camera thing anyway, it’s not even relevant.
Simple (or not so) fact is that using PBR means that what gets rendered internally must be adjusted in order to be displayed on a monitor. There isn’t a setting that will work for all circumstances, so the adjustment must somehow be dynamic.
2 Likes
No of course they don’t… depth of field is a portion of an image that is sharp compared to the rest of an image. it is achieved using long focal length and an wide aperture eyes don’t do this the closest you can get is holding a finger near your eye and if your eyes are good enough you can switch focus between the finger and the background but when you walk around the street or drive your car everything is in focus and in fact with a camera everything is in focus too on a wide or prime lens, it takes a long focal length to create depth of field or being very close to something. It is pretty much completely artificial , the reason it is used a lot in film and photography is because images on a screen are flat there and there is a lack of depth compared to the real world we see, it was utilised to draw your attention to one piece of an image without the rest getting in the way or to declutter an image so cinematically it works well and is great for storytelling purposes but it isn’t natural and when used wrong ( on a wide image) looks weird
2 Likes
Again the point is not the technics on how something is rendered but effects added to the finished look that emulate a camera and not the eye with the g force setting we DO simulate the grey out we would see a camera wouldn’t grey out so yay that’s ok… but other effects are added that are wrong like eye adaption essentially its become the auto exposure of a camera and that’s totally unrealistic unless you’re flying a drone
2 Likes
in real life, eye adaption works much faster
For the sake of accuracy in this conversation I just want to clarify that, if by adaptation you mean the fluctuation of the pupil to take in more or less light, then no, real life eye adaption is not faster than in the game.
What’s really happening here is two things. One, the human eye is sensitive to detail in a huge range of brightness, enough to cover both the cockpit and the cloudscape all at once. Two, the human brain dynamically messes with perceived brightness throughout the scene to create the illusion of a balanced image. This is the basis of numerous optical illusions, like when geometric patterns of black and white lines seem to create colors or movement. Your brain is brightening and darkening various elements of the image, trying to bring the extreme contrast into equilibrium, and chaos ensues. And this is also why it is that you can sit in a car or a cockpit and perceive both interior and exterior to be of roughly equal brightness - even as your camera is utterly incapable of properly exposing more than one or the other at a time.
3 Likes
Perhaps could Asobo/MS could add a cursor to set from a range of 0 auto adaptation (no transition, the outside and the internal cockpit would be seen in a equal and related light level) up to full auto adaptation (full current transition level allowed), so anyone could find its own taste on this part ?
Think you’re confusing things a bit here. The eye has two methods of adapting to brightness. The first is the size of the pupil which is fast. The second is sensitivity of the retina, which is indeed much slower. From wikipedia…
“…it re-adjusts its exposure by adjusting the iris, which adjusts the size of the pupil. Initial dark adaptation takes place in approximately four seconds of profound, uninterrupted darkness; full adaptation through adjustments in retinal rod photoreceptors is 80% complete in thirty minutes.”
1 Like
Sorry, yes you are correct. I’ve edited the post. But still in either case the effect is not faster than the in-game exposure adjustment.
1 Like
Hello all.
Anybody that flies MSFS knows that the sim adjusts the brightness based on where your camera is pointed. But, during approaches, this is VERY hard to simulate. Why?
In real life, the pilot sometimes looks outside to see the runway, then sometimes he changes, looking at the PFD and speed, then chaning again to look to the runway. He focus on what he want to see. In the sim, we don’t land moving the camera. We land on a fixed camera placed on the Virtual Cockpit in which we can see the runway and the PFD at the same time. And the brightness adjustment that the sim makes is always give less focus on the runway. So if it’s NIGHTIME or if it’s daytime with CAVOK weather, the runway is so dark or so bright that you almost can’t see.
My question is: Is there any possibility to reduce this effect in the whole sim or turn it off during night time?
Look at these images:
1- Ready for taxi. Looking at the panel and ouside. This is my takeoff/landing/taxi/cruise camera. Can’t see nothing outside.
2- Looking outside. The darkness is completely gone. Now I can see details that I couldn’t see before just moving up a little bit my camera. How am I supposed to land like this?
I don’t find it realistic. Just wanted an option to turn it off or that it gets adjusted. Everybody knows that nights without moon are unrealisticaly dark in the simulator. Mixing this with that…
Whats your opinion on this? Any change of this getting repaired?
Regards!
2 Likes
They are pretty different as you can’t see absolutely nothing on the first one. The nights without moon in MSFS are overly dark and you can notice it watching any of the billion videos on YouTube performing a takeoff or landing. What really bothers me is that any issue reported here in the forum that someone is trying to make the sim better, there’s at least 1 comment treating it normally like nothing is wrong. The sim is not perfect guys, there’s a lot missing and a lot of bugs yet. Regards.
1 Like
Fair enough, I apologize for my comment which was not actually helpful or productive.
1 Like
I am sick of this conversation as nothing happens. But his one takes the cake.
I don’t care about some fancy algorithms, as one user wrote: the bottom line is I can’t read instruments. It is even noticeable in vr. Unfortunately the situation is quite similar in X plane 12. Bit it is perfect in X plane 11.
I have a feeling that people that like this effect don’t really care what instruments show. They are just here for the gaming, not simulating.
I am using X plane 11 even though I have also 12 and fs. I just care more about flying then lookin at pretty scenery.
2 Likes
well, no offense, but there are thousands of others (me) who “simulate” very well than fly and that meanwhile almost 1500 hours and I never had problems with reading the instruments.
If you have ever been in a real cockpit - the problem with the “sunlight” is also there - so it is very much “part” of the simulation!
The illumination of MSFS and XP12 - also to the outside - is quite realistic - the fading effect more or less - that is debatable - but it is supposed to represent the effect of a sunlit cockpit - which it does partly well - on a PC screen probably not otherwise representable.
There are a number of tools (“ReShade”, Nvidia Filters) that can be used to help with this, and you can also set the “EyeAdaptation 1” entry in the “UserCfg” to “0” (as workaround). There should perhaps be an option in the settings, but I don’t think it’s right to turn off the effect completely (for others) just because you PERSONALLY don’t like it - and as you rightly pointed out - you can stay with XP11 !
BR
2 Likes
Easy “partial” work around… better than nothing – or you can take your SunGlasses off !!
Hi,
It is not just me personally, there are a lot of people complaining about this.
I will try reshade to see if it has desired effect.
Changing cfg file does nothing for me.
I am not saying to remove effect if some people like it. But isn’t it time Asobo does something about it? It is clearly an issue for some.
How come you never had problems with reading the instruments? Aren’t they dark for you? Is there some other setting you use or have adjusted your monitor?
My experience is that you cannot do much with adjusting monitor because if you improve visibility in certain area you lose it in other area.