+1 for a toggle. On for the new lighting, off for how it was before. Everyone's happy.
Starlight tints background skybox - Lighting issues
- Thread starter Valorin
- Start date
Yes, that’s exactly what’s going on Old Duck – and this is why it indiscriminately tints the entire screen (including HUD) and why people see the effect fade in when they exit the galaxy map etc. Attempts to explain or justify it in any other way are merely a distraction. I develop GLSL based software, so I know a post-processing shader when I see one.
http://alaingalvan.tumblr.com/post/79864187609/glsl-color-correction-shaders
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...hting-issues?p=7263883&viewfull=1#post7263883
They’ve undoubtedly made other tweaks to the lighting system (volumetric effects etc), but the source of the controversy is the post-rasterization colour grading filter (applied after the scene is rendered as an image).
As such, it’s not a bug per se, but a deliberate design decision. Unfortunately, there’s no fix that I can see beyond reducing the filter or disabling it altogether. Since some people love it, the only fair option is to provide a toggle or a % setting for users to tweak to taste.
Last edited:
Yep, that seems like a perfectly sane and fair approach. It's difficult to gauge the consensus, or what % of the player base dislike the filters, but there seems to be enough dissenting voices to justify it.
I’m betting it was less of a design decision and more of a design limitation. Probably for performance reasons, as applying the filter “properly” by selective layering of the output render costs cycles to accomplish, whereas simply throwing a filter over the single final output image is much cheaper to do cycle wise. Same reason why we didn’t get multiple light sources for 3.3, it’s not that they can’t do it, it’s that they can’t do it within acceptable performance metrics. It’s also why ship lights can’t be brighter.
Will we ever see either multiple light sources or a more realistic color gradient implemented? That likely depends on future optimizations freeing up computing overhead, or on a more long term road hardware advances. So probably no time soon, if ever. Space Engine can do it because it’s not a game but a focused simulation of space, it doesn’t have AI or player routines or background sim or spaceships to juggle with it’s processing power, so it can get away with a more robust and thorough lighting engine than Elite can pull off.
That make me sad though, because I’d rather see the better lighting engine in Elite.
Sterling MH
Banned
However, this only works if nothing else were changed. This is an assumption based on ignorance. If other things WERE changed AS WELL AS the final colour grading pass, then switching off the colour grading pass will STILL change the look of the game.
It's impossible to gauge what FD did. Yet people still insist absolutely that they do know.
IF they give a switch to turn off the final colour grading pass and nothing else, will anyone agree to never complain about the graphics after that change, at the very least until the next graphics update?
Remember, too, if they do future tweaks, they would have to test every scenario twice: once for "with colour grading" and once for "No colour grading pass".
So simple change. But burning down your house is a simple change. Being homeless is its own challenge...
Sterling MH
Banned
The monitor also indiscriminately tins the entire screen. So does your hobbit hole's lamp. Do you colour grade your monitor properly so that you can get a consistent colour match? No? That indiscriminately tints the entire screen.
Moreover, as said time and time again to you, the screen tint is entirely realistic. White balance is a thing, no matter how many links to shader language tutorials you post. And that causes entire screen tint. Try it. Set the white balance to the wrong setting. Take a picture. See the tint. INDISRIMINATELY.
Because the light does tint everything with its colour. Indiscriminately. Makng this realistic.
Moreover, it isnt indiscriminate. Go to a Gtype system with only one star and no nebulae. No tint.
There's discrimination. Not indiscriminate.
Sterling MH
Banned
Unless there's more done than just colour grading, in which case there is no way to toggle how it was before. Making you unhappy even though they did as you asked.
I’m betting it was less of a design decision and more of a design limitation. Probably for performance reasons, as applying the filter “properly” by selective layering of the output render costs cycles to accomplish, whereas simply throwing a filter over the single final output image is much cheaper to do cycle wise. Same reason why we didn’t get multiple light sources for 3.3, it’s not that they can’t do it, it’s that they can’t do it within acceptable performance metrics. It’s also why ship lights can’t be brighter.
Will we ever see either multiple light sources or a more realistic color gradient implemented? That likely depends on future optimizations freeing up computing overhead, or on a more long term road hardware advances. So probably no time soon, if ever. Space Engine can do it because it’s not a game but a focused simulation of space, it doesn’t have AI or player routines or background sim or spaceships to juggle with it’s processing power, so it can get away with a more robust and thorough lighting engine than Elite can pull off.
That make me sad though, because I’d rather see the better lighting engine in Elite.
Yes, you're 100% correct Mengy - efficiency is the main benefit of these shaders, and you can do some fairly dynamic and sophisticated things with them. I understand their thinking - it's a cheap way of adding variety and ambience, but misguided in my personal view, given the nature of the game and the fact that the UI elements are rendered as part of the scene.
Last edited:
Sterling MH
Banned
See, that's a point. Even though I have full colour vision, and even if I were not liable to have the rendered HUD hidden by the view outside the cockpit, solely for the colour blind, SOME colour options for the HUD elements would be easier to place up and make optional for the users.
Think on tis, though. Star citizen ALSO tries to make "headcanon realistic" UIs too. They too are not coloured, not for the colourblind, anyway, no real world fighter HUD does: they don't hire colourblind pilots.
So a consequence of wanting "realistic looking UI elements" is being told what colour those UI elements are going to be. At least looks like it.
The filters are variable and dynamic (reducing as you move away from the star, changing between systems etc), but it can’t distinguish between HUD, skybox and so on. That’s what I mean by indiscriminate. This is because it's being applied at a later stage of the rendering pipeline, after the 3D scene has been rendered as a flat image. All it has is pixel data and the variables that you feed it from the game (distance from star etc). It only acts on pixel data, like any other image processing app.
Last edited:
Agreed 100%.
Sterling MH
Banned
So not indiscriminate. No more than ANY OTHER REAL LIFE LIGHT SOURCE IS. Get further away from the orange light from the street into the warm white light of your house light and the tint changes.
Colour perception is inherently weaker than monochromatic. A trichromat can only accept one third of the photons that a monochromat can. So when the light tinting the scene is fainter, the monochromatic rods see the signal beter than the colour cones do. So the picture looks less coloured.
Look at the green green grass of home at night. Even under a fairly bright moon, the grass ain't green. All that happened was the light from the sun got a lot weaker. Same as if you went further away from it.
The grass is still green, it's just not illuminated as brightly. That's lower intensity light, not light coloring, which is what this discussion is about.
Elite does this well, just look at a gas giant orbiting an M star 10,000ls out. It will be very dark compared to what it looks like in the system map.
Last edited:
They could poll players via game registration e-mails like they did with ship transfers. Weeds out the fakes and gives a very accurate picture.
Since when does grass EMIT light? [wacky]
To what end?
If 5% of players find the new lighting unacceptable, is that sufficiet grounds for a patch?
I mean 5% isn't a lot but it is an estimated 5,000-odd players who aren't happy with the game they've paid for.
The actual point of my post resides behind the comma:
rhiz said:
I'm sorry Sterling MH, but I can't help you any more than I have.
Last edited:
I don't think 5% is enough really, and I doubt 5% is accurate anyway probably a lot lower.
The whole idea behind a poll (and a possible toggle not a patch) would be to work from decent information.
Sterling MH
Banned
Go have a word with the moderators. That comment has NOTHING to do with anything.
Sterling MH
Banned
Well you've only helped me counter your claims. Your assertions keep pretending "my point is ACTUALLY this...." when this is just a fake. The "actual point" perenially changes and only ever exists in that one claim what your "actual point" is.
The real point is that you used "indiscriminate" as an attempt to poison the well. There is no lighting system that does not for the whole field of view change the white balance. Not a single real world case. Yet you demand to use it because it SOUNDS like it's bad.
There's nothing to say that not applying the final correction will make anyone happy nor bring back the previous colour.
Nothing you say changes that. And that remains no matter how much you try to scream "EXTREME!!!!" or "INDISCRIMONATE!!!".
It is neither. You just don't like it so you use words that paint it in a bad light. Don't like it all you like. Make up whaa your "actual point" is as much as you wish. the colour grading is not as you paint it a hack job ruination. And removing it does not guarantee the old look.