Starlight tints background skybox - Lighting issues

[nanite2000]

Looks like there might be a way to restore some of the old lighting functionality:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...Beyond-Ultra?p=7266572&viewfull=1#post7266572

Although, please note Morbad's comment:

"the global color filter introduced in 3.3 is still present, just slightly subdued with the new lighting balances disabled."

How interesting is that?!?

 

[Valorin]

Looks like there might be a way to restore some of the old lighting functionality:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...Beyond-Ultra?p=7266572&viewfull=1#post7266572

Although, please note Morbad's comment:

"the global color filter introduced in 3.3 is still present, just slightly subdued with the new lighting balances disabled."

How interesting is that?!?

That's certainly interesting, but looks like we're only half there. It's also not the solution I am looking for. For one an ini tweak would also help PC players (that's me!), but what I would love is a way for configuring the lighting ourselves in game's graphics settings. I am not sure if Frontier is aiming for a uniform look and therefore wouldn't want us to change setting that much, but to be honest, in the end we are the ones who play the game and if there is a way to tweak the graphics to our liking, why not give us a way. Perhaps that's underway and just didn't make it into the initial release (which I hope very much).

But well, that's what I actually want: to raise some awareness to the part of the community who are into this game so much because of its approach on science and would love to see the new lighting to be in line with that. It's an issue for a lot of players (which I also see on the reputation counter) and also not the only issue with the lighting changes.
I'm all for options here to make the lighing look the way we want, but those sliders or toggles should go all the way and not just shut down the whole thing like that ini tweak. I would hate to see ambient light on dark sides of planets again if there is no visible light source that would justify that, for example.

 

[Sterling MH]

to raise some awareness to the part of the community who are into this game so much because of its approach on science and would love to see the new lighting to be in line with that.

It already is in line with reality. It's not what you want, but your opinion is not the same as reality.

you don't like it. You want to change it to what you want. No problem. The problem is this: your want is not because it is more realistic. Every time you conflate your preferences with objective facts I will reply with "Nope, it's fine as it is. More realistic".

 

[nanite2000]

That's certainly interesting, but looks like we're only half there. It's also not the solution I am looking for. For one an ini tweak would also help PC players (that's me!), but what I would love is a way for configuring the lighting ourselves in game's graphics settings. I am not sure if Frontier is aiming for a uniform look and therefore wouldn't want us to change setting that much, but to be honest, in the end we are the ones who play the game and if there is a way to tweak the graphics to our liking, why not give us a way. Perhaps that's underway and just didn't make it into the initial release (which I hope very much).

But well, that's what I actually want: to raise some awareness to the part of the community who are into this game so much because of its approach on science and would love to see the new lighting to be in line with that. It's an issue for a lot of players (which I also see on the reputation counter) and also not the only issue with the lighting changes.
I'm all for options here to make the lighing look the way we want, but those sliders or toggles should go all the way and not just shut down the whole thing like that ini tweak. I would hate to see ambient light on dark sides of planets again if there is no visible light source that would justify that, for example.

Yea, that’s fair enough. We all want the game to be as visually pleasing and accurate as possible, and the current filters don’t seem to provide an accurate representation of what it would really be like.

Here’s hoping FDev will continue to improve it in future.

 

[Mengy]

It already is in line with reality. It's not what you want, but your opinion is not the same as reality.

How can you say that?

This is how the Milky Way looks from high Earth orbit, this is reality:

This is how it now looks in Elite after 3.3:

The current iteration in the game is factually NOT in line with reality. We have readily available evidence to prove it. You could say you prefer the 3.3 gradient subjectively, but that would be your opinion. Stating that 3.3's coloring is in line with reality is blatantly incorrect. Period.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

How can you say that?

This is how the Milky Way looks from high Earth orbit, this is reality:




This is how it now looks in Elite after 3.3:




The current iteration in the game is factually NOT in line with reality. We have readily available evidence to prove it. You could say you prefer the 3.3 gradient subjectively, but that would be your opinion. Stating that 3.3's coloring is in line with reality is blatantly incorrect. Period.

Even harder to understand since sunlight is basically white.
Even if you would assume the skybox is illuminated by the sun (which it obviously isn't), you really have to wonder where the orange is coming from????

 

[DaveB]

Plus the complaint is that the multiple sources colour things.

You can also do this test on a clear day. Stand with your back to the sun. Look at the blue sky.

The interstellar medium is rarer than the interplanetary one. The aurorae happen because empty space still has a lot of cruft in it.

And, if you're lucky with low light pollution, you can see the sun's lights long after it is hidden from view. Google for pictures of "Zodiacal light" to see people lucky enough to see the sun illuminating "empty space".

Your firsrt statement is factually incorrect. The complaint is not that multiple sources color things. It has nothing to do with the rendering of lights. The scene is fully rendered,taking into account all active light sources, before the postprocessing happens. In the postprocessing is an overapplied color gradient, based on the local star color. This applies the color gradient to everything, not just those elements of the scene which would be impacted by the local stars light. Because that color gradient is too intensely applied this creates obvious visual artefacts, the worst of which is tinting the skybox.

There is nowhere in ED where the effects that cause a blue sky would be visible. That is atmospheric scattering of sunlight alone and we can't land on atmospheric planets yet. Your second statement is therefore irrelevant as there is no scene yet rendered in ED where any aspect of this effect should be implemented.

Your third point is unfortunately also bogus. Yes the interstellar medium is rarer than the interplanetary one. Neither is dense enough to reflect light in significant quantities to even compare to the light from a directly observed visual-magnitude distant star. ED does enhance this a little to intensify the density and colors of nebulae but even this enhancement is insufficient to cause any kind of reflective haze in interplanetary OR interstellar space. As for why the aurorae happen you're just wrong. The energetic charged particles of the solar wind interacting with a planetary magnetic field are why aurorae happen. They emit light because those particles are impacting the atmosphere at high energies. The "lot of cruft" in "empty space" does not contribute to the aurorae one bit.

Only your 4th point, regarding zodiacal light, is correct - zodiacal light is reflected from space dust. Which only concentrates sufficiently well to be visible at all within the orbital plane of the system. So, while you are correct that "empty" space can reflect light is true enough an overall color gradient wash does not simulate this in any meaningful way.

 

[Guest193293]

And pre-update:

 

[nanite2000]

And pre-patch:

I remember an early FDev development video (sorry - can’t remember which one exactly) where they talked about the colour of the Milky Way.

I seem to recall they had a choice of what the overall colour temperature of the galaxy should be. It could have been a cool white (almost blue), as shown in an earlier picture, a bright white as shown in Mengy’s, or the warm white as shown in yours.

They opted for the warm white, as it better suited their overall artistic design feel. And it looked great.

So it seems a bit odd that this artistic intent has been dismissed in favour of the deep orange colour the Milky Way has now when seen from Earth in-game.

 

[DaveB]

I remember an early FDev development video (sorry - can’t remember which one exactly) where they talked about the colour of the Milky Way.

I seem to recall they had a choice of what the overall colour temperature of the galaxy should be. It could have been a cool white (almost blue), as shown in an earlier picture, a bright white as shown in Mengy’s, or the warm white as shown in yours.

They opted for the warm white, as it better suited their overall artistic design feel. And it looked great.

So it seems a bit odd that this artistic intent has been dismissed in favour of the deep orange colour the Milky Way has now when seen from Earth in-game. ��

The irony is that they almost certainly haven't dismissed it, that they are still rendering the skybox at the same color. Unfortunately, then the postprocess with its over-active color gradient stomps all over it.

 

[Mengy]

The irony is that they almost certainly haven't dismissed it, that they are still rendering the skybox at the same color. Unfortunately, then the postprocess with its over-active color gradient stomps all over it.

Very true. You can use entering and exiting supercruise to toggle the new filter off, and then you see the old familiar colored Milky Way hiding back there behind the new filter.

 

[Dutchman141]

Very true. You can use entering and exiting supercruise to toggle the new filter off, and then you see the old familiar colored Milky Way hiding back there behind the new filter.

Well lets have an option then to turn that filter off.
And a dimmer on stationlights please.

 

[Maro-Val]

Photos from Yesterday, T-TAURI system.. Jesus lol.

 

[Stigbob]

Photos from Yesterday, T-TAURI system.. Jesus lol.

They all look good to me, except the distorted egg star.

 

[Morbad]

Well lets have an option then to turn that filter off.

Main game directory -> GraphicsConfig.xml -> 'HDR_NodeReference' section -> 'ToneMapType' 'PrototypeLightingBalancesEnabled' = 0

And a dimmer on stationlights please.

Same place, or optionally add the options to the override xml in the settings directory, and find the Bloom settings for the quality you are using and reduce the glare scale.

Edit: It appears you are on XBox. Looks like your up some creek without a paddle, for now.

 

[A D]

its no lighting issue in the first place

its a color filter applied to the whole scene.

thats the difference between turning a light blue, or looking through blue tinted glasses.

makes me really wonder WHY they did it that way. is there something special about the light emitted from stars in the game engine that doesn't allow them to change color?
i see colored weapon FX casting colored lights on ships, dynamically. but the single main light source can't do that?
do they have to resort to post processing colorization of the whole screen because they have too bright white light baked into the interiour textures of the krait and anaconda?

I put a post in the VR sub-forum that may be related to this issue. This "post processing colorization of the whole screen" appears as a curtain in VR. By that I mean that in VR you can actually see it being dropped or raised for a split second when you first enter or leave the game. It's very noticeable. Apart from the tinting issue (which I confess I hadn't noticed before reading the OP) this overlay seems to have another effect which is dumbing down the graphics i.e. in VR the graphics now look washed out, bland and lacking in detail (even using ultra settings). I pointed this out in my post but the reaction seems to be meh, which really surprises me given how bad the graphics now are. Maybe its not so noticeable on a monitor. Now with the tinting issue in this thread's OP it's not looking good at all!

 

[A D]

I really hope that this graphic filter can be (or will be able) switched off at least with using personalised graphic profille. I also hope that this thing will be adressed MUCH faster as it was with that fiasco with anaconda cockpit which lasted for months (now it "only" affects everything included ship HUDs). I so wish enjoy new game content, but ...

Nope… literally spent the whole Sunday fiddling with the filmic and ACES tone mapping settings in the graphics configuration file (override) and made not a the slightest difference. It looks to be a server-side setting.

 

[Valorin]

Main game directory -> GraphicsConfig.xml -> 'HDR_NodeReference' section -> 'ToneMapType' = 0



Same place, or optionally add the options to the override xml in the settings directory, and find the Bloom settings for the quality you are using and reduce the glare scale.

Edit: It appears you are on XBox. Looks like your up some creek without a paddle, for now.

But that also brings back planets back to normal where the dark sides are not dark anymore along with other things. I'll sure play around with these settings when I have the time, but I fear that's not a real fix.

 

[A D]

But that also brings back planets back to normal where the dark sides are not dark anymore along with other things. I'll sure play around with these settings when I have the time, but I fear that's not a real fix.

Tried that (really). Didn't matter. The only setting that made any difference, and had the effect described in the above post, was the first setting relating to the color balance prototype. Putting that to "0" kills some of the big changes to the lighting but its very bright.

...and BTW I agree with Morbad, the game in VR now looks like my old Xbox One. So disappointing.

 

[Morbad]

Tried that (really). Didn't matter. The only setting that made any difference, and had the effect described in the above post, was the first setting relating to the color balance prototype. Putting that to "0" kills some of the big changes to the lighting but its very bright.

Yeah, I mixed up the two settings.

However, turning off the prototype light balance while leaving the tone maping seems to get rid of the filter without harming brightness. Still need to test these settings more on planets though.

Regardless, even if it goes back to the old lighting system entirely, acceptable results on planets should be possible by toning down the IBL.