Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by skyh, Jan 4, 2015.
Something seems to be in the air these days.
But if obliged to take a picture at such time, he will not over expose two stops to make it look crapier.
If shooting from a dark surrounding a bright scene, he willl not average exposure of surrounding and scene. He will expose for the scene, and then bring up in post processing the shadows of the dark surrounding if he was unable to lit it when taking the picture.
If the race is in the middle of the day, I have to shoot it in the middle of the day. Seeing as we're talking about motorsport here that doesn't really apply.
Bottom-line for me is that the lighting in rF2 can look great--at times when races are typically not run. Based on that, I have faith that the HDR mess will eventually get fixed. The recent update improved it a baby step or two. Soon, we will have the ridiculous over-exposure from inside a closed cockpit fixed. I have resorted to using bonnet cam for closed-top cars because I can't stand to run with that over-exposure when a single button-click away is a scene that more of then than not looks just fine. Then, all that will be left are the excessive jaggies and crawling textures/objects, reflections, and the heat haze bubble bug and I will be quite satisfied. The core look of the graphics when not ruined by one of the aforementioned is more than acceptable and as DD said above, even superior in some ways like long distance level of detail.
Now, should people incessantly whinge about these same issues, most of which have been around in one form or another for three years? It's clear that whinging hasn't changed ISI's priority list or, more importantly, got any resources added to deal with these issues. My answer: yes. Yes because most of the people complaining are passionate about rF2 and want it to succeed. So when these issues are finally addressed and rF2 is then not laughed out of the room by the 99% of racing game fans who are not us (hardcore sim people), we can say told you so and you should have done it sooner. If ISI doesn't get around to fixing these issues before it is too late (the quality modding community abandons rF2), then we can say told you so and you should have done it sooner. A records of that will be useful for others in the future and for dissecting ISI's position. At a minimum, whether they can or choose to do something about it, ISI should know what it's most passionate customers think about its product. I think they demonstrate that they do that every day with this forum and various staff participation here.
Also not many know that for example F1 races, FOM uses filters on their cameras to brighten up etc the image. For example Suzuka last year. It was semi dark, nothing major, when looking at the TV right? Check photos that were taken without any additional post processing and filters at the same time. It was dark. Really dark.
Same happens at times that picture may look flat. Not many know how much filtering and other stuff is happening. I agree that flat look at noon in rF2 is an issue because even in RL it isn't as flat. It just needs lots of tweaking and maybe some features implemented.
One thing that I really miss in rF2 right now is the "feeling of warmth". When you look at the screen and you are somewhere hot and sunny. 40 C, middle of summer, sunny, no clouds at all. You can see a pic from such a place taken by different cameras or even be there and look outside your window. You can really tell just by looking that it's hot and sunny. rF2 had it in early builds. Now you still can get it on certain tracks (Mores is the best example) but I would love to feel like I'm sweating just by looking at my monitor. Ofc not all the time because rarely we have conditions like this but when we do have I want to feel like we have them.
If ISI is meeting their sales goal with RF2, then they are doing it their own way, and they are right in doing so.
If not, then ...
Think it's time this interview with Gjon is to be shown again for those that may of missed, the following paragraph perfectly sums up ISIs way of doing things:
"We are fortunate in that we aren’t obligated to a predefined design or schedule. This allows us to refine things at our own pace, involve the community, and have a quality of life not typically found in many software development organizations. This of course makes it difficult to predict when certain features will be ready for public release, hence we don’t make those types of announcements."
All set out beautifully...
It just has to remembered.
...and you should add
Indeed, they know what they're doing.
Maybe I am wrong (and correct me if I am wrong) but, what I understood after three years of rF2 is that the idea behind it is to simulate the real light.
Real light means what people really see with their eyes in that particular location, in that particular time of the year and day (hard coded in the track?)
NOT what people see through a photo or (worse) through a bad cockpit camera.
Ever wondered why rF2 doesn't have lens flaring?
Because human eyes don't have lens flaring!
If you race at noon the light is flat and dull because so it appears in reality (generally speking photo and video shoot at noon ARE flat and dull also, I normally use a polarizer to get things better).
About "light warmth":
IMHO Mores seems hot because it is hot, located in one of the hottest place of Italy.
IMHO Silverstone NO because is in England farther north than Mores.
If you open a session and put 40°C at Silverstone, the lighting you get is indipendent from the temperature you input, so it will not "look" hot because sun rays are not so high and so on.
If the race is in the middle of the day one have to race in the middle of the day where, as a matter of fact, the light is flat and dull.
When driving in Southern Italy (or Utah desert FWIW) I tend to use a pair of Ray-Ban with polarized lens.
I think you guys sometimes miss the lat/long variable. The "noon aka dull" concept just doesn't exist in real life as it depends on lat and seasons. There are places where you get a low sun elevation at noon and others where you get an extremely high sun elevation and this affects the overall scene lighting and the range of time where you still get LOT of sunlight and glare along the sky. Noon it's just the position of the sun when crossing the meridian (max elevation) but this varies A LOT between equator and poles (as well for the entire daylight analemma).
This is a "noon" at Islay
You are acting like I don't know it and accept it as a reality. ;]
Just tell those people that rFactor 2 is the most mature platform right now, supporting most forms of racing without fuss. 40+ large grid offline/online racing with proper racing and flag rules for multiple types of series, AI pitstops, good AI, great FFB, chassis flex (essential for properly simulating karts and historic race cars), visible tire flex, contact patch modeling with flatspots, dynamic realroad track and rain/weather conditions, 24 hour race support with full/day night cycles, onlne/offline driver swaps, resume from replay savegames, autodownloading of multiplayer mods, mature league support, proper car damage, proper steering assist for keyboards racers, etc etc. A complete racing experience.
From marketing standpoint it would be a lot easier just to fix/improve the remaining graphics issues rather than trying to convince people otherwise. To throw a bit poor analogy, it would be the same as going to nightclub with a poster "I might not look pretty, but I have many other good features". Looks matter the most for first impression. Screenshots/videos are the best marketing tool and in those graphics is always the prevalent thing.
Actually they do. and when squinting looking at the sun, eyelashes can create flare-like irregularities, although these are technically diffraction artifacts. In addition, when racing you would normally view a bright light source such as the sun through a helmet visor or a windscreen.
I really wish it were that simple. I really wish highest quality and best motivation products would always win. But the history of our world suggests not only is that not true, it's almost the opposite. Mediocrity reigns supreme--as long as it has a good marketing campaign behind it. For a niche, special product to "win," it has to be very carefully managed. Accepting that the masses want pretty pictures first and excellent depth of simulation not likely at all means that you have to swallow your pride and pay attention to presentation first. Because some proportion of those masses who seek the shiny baubles may be surprised and realize there is so much more going on here and become converts to quality simming. It would only take a sliver of a fraction of the PC console-type titles racing community to be converted and it would double or triple or more the current rF2 user base. With that, ISI might be able to afford to finish the masterpiece before 2020.
Cracked me up!
Separate names with a comma.