Request Real sunlight and shadows

[ZacharyS41]

Is there a possibility that somebody could create a texture or mesh that includes real sunlight and shadows on Earth? I mean on the Space Shuttle Atlantis, for example. Also, if you don't think I make sense, I mean: "dramatic atmospheric effects that resulted in a brilliant ring of light ballooning, flickering and collapsing around the accelerating spacecraft". That's quoted and sponsored by Spaceflight Now.

 

[Urwumpe]

That question would be better placed into the Visualization Client subforum.

But it sounds like Lens Flares, and we don't really appreciate them... because they are unrealistic unless you simulate a special camera model. The human eye does not have them.

And a Halo would only appear if there is lots of fog... what we don't usually have, since Orbiter has no weather.

 

[Cras]

But it sounds like Lens Flares, and we don't really appreciate them...

Speak for yourself. You may not appreciate them, but don't then lump us all into that crowd. Lens flare in orbiter would add a lot.

 

[Mojave]

Speak for yourself. You may not appreciate them, but don't then lump us all into that crowd. Lens flare in orbiter would add a lot.

I always assume I'm playing orbiter as if I was looking through somebody filming anyway. So what I see I presume is through an actual camera. Lensflare would add to my immersion experience. The addition of these camera effects would be cool. Of course, you could toggle them off. It would be a win/win.

 

[Urwumpe]

Speak for yourself. You may not appreciate them, but don't then lump us all into that crowd. Lens flare in orbiter would add a lot.

Yes. It would add a lot of nothing for people who feel like something is unrealistic only because it has no stupid Michael Bay Lens Flares in it.

Maybe it is a thing of the older ones here, but I am happy that I don't see lens flares, that consume just computing power for making things look like filmed with a very cheap camera.

And no. I don't want to feel like Michael Bay is filming my movie. My director of choice is Clint Eastwood.

 

[goaowonk]

I'm with you Urwumpe: our eyes do not suffer lens flares, and that would be processing time for nothing (as I've always used low end computers I do appreciate optimization as a very important factor).

Sent from my Deltaglider using Potatolk.

 

[Cras]

you think Clint Eastwood doesnt use lens flare? And you think it is only cheap cameras that produce them? sorry, but no.

 

[Urwumpe]

you think Clint Eastwood doesnt use lens flare? And you think it is only cheap cameras that produce them? sorry, but no.

Sorry, but yes. Good cameras have effectively zero lens flares.

And : "David Boyd, the director of photography of the sci-fi Firefly series, desired this style so much (harking back to 1970s television), that he sent back the cutting-edge lenses which reduced lens flare in exchange for cheaper ones"

 

[Cras]

Sorry, but yes. Good cameras have effectively zero lens flares.

Sorry but no, and I will take my word on it as a professional cinematographer. You telling me Star Trek was shot on a bad camera? You gonna call the Alexa or the Epic a bad camera? You gonna tell me Nikon makes bad lenses?

 

[Mojave]

Let's assume there are people out there that want the option? Shouldn't it be implemented for those select people that want it?

You don't want to have lens flare activated just deactivate it. How is this even difficult?

Hell, the lens flare is not even implemented and probably won't be so there is really no need to debate over it.

Think of it this way. I like Bluegrass music. Do you? If you don't than what do you do? You don't listen to it!! Imagine the Bluegrass is the lens flare and just shun it like you would anything else you dislike...

 

[Urwumpe]

Sorry but no, and I will take my word on it as a professional cinematographer. You telling me Star Trek was shot on a bad camera? You gonna call the Alexa or the Epic a bad camera? You gonna tell me Nikon makes bad lenses?

Yes, exactly. Now look up "deliberate lens flares" in your dictionary. "Professional cinematographer"... And not even knowing his trade.

J. J. Abrams, the director of the 2009 version of Star Trek, used this technique. "I wanted a visual system that felt unique. I know there are certain shots where even I watch and think, 'Oh that's ridiculous, that was too many.' But I love the idea that the future was so bright it couldn't be contained in the frame." Many complained of the frequent use; Abrams admitted it was "overdone, in some places.

 

[Loru]

Yes. It would add a lot of nothing for people who feel like something is unrealistic only because it has no stupid Michael Bay Lens Flares in it. ...

I think JJ Abrams uses it far more than Bay (who excells in pointless explosions and helicopters in the sun)

My take on lens flares: They can add to scene dynamic/dramaticity a lot if done properly but it can make screen unwatchable if overused (TBH that's my main critism of new Startrek movies) or done poorely (think of digital lens flares that looked like straight from photoshop/premiere default filter).

In orbiter that's matter of choice IMO. Some prefer realistic aproach (unless you have bad glasses you don't see LF with your eyes). Some prefer more cinematic experience.

On/Off option in video/effects tab would satisfy all, however I'm not sure it wouldn't interfere with render queue in orbiter (LF is usually rendered last and overlayed on scene - It may mess up with hud/mfd render a bit but that's question for martins, jarmonik and whoever is developing d3d11 client.)

 

[Mojave]

I think JJ Abrams uses it far more than Bay (who excells in pointless explosions and helicopters in the sun)

My take on lens flares: They can add to scene dynamic/dramaticity a lot if done properly but it can make screen unwatchable if overused (TBH that's my main critism of new Startrek movies) or done poorely (think of digital lens flares that looked like straight from photoshop/premiere default filter).

In orbiter that's matter of choice IMO. Some prefer realistic aproach (unless you have bad glasses you don't see LF with your eyes). Some prefer more cinematic experience.

On/Off option in video/effects tab would satisfy all, however I'm not sure it wouldn't interfere with render queue in orbiter (LF is usually rendered last and overlayed on scene - It may mess up with hud/mfd render a bit but that's question for martins, jarmonik and whoever is developing d3d11 client.)

Thank you, someone out there that gets it.

 

[Loru]

Is there a possibility that somebody could create a texture or mesh that includes real sunlight and shadows on Earth? I mean on the Space Shuttle Atlantis, for example. Also, if you don't think I make sense, I mean: "dramatic atmospheric effects that resulted in a brilliant ring of light ballooning, flickering and collapsing around the accelerating spacecraft". That's quoted and sponsored by Spaceflight Now.

I took my shoot at lens flare above.

As for shadows - I know Jarmonik was experimenting with mapped shadows in d3d9. This Technique allows a variety of shadow types including blurred and sharp shadows - drawback - more accurate/sharp shadow means bigger "shadow map" and good effects aren't rather realtime.

Second technique is raytracing which gives very sharp and realistic shadows allowing even colored ones (if passed to semi transparent colored glass) however this technique is CPU/GPU heavy.

I think simplified version is used in orbiter (that's question again for developers of graphical engines)

For realistic shadows you need also something called "ambient occlusion" which isn't easy to calculate (usually games are using pre rendered occlusion maps placed on meshed but they're not updated dynamically - newer games use something like [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_space_ambient_occlusion"]Screen space ambient occlusion[/ame] however I don't know how hoard would it be to implement)

---------- Post added at 09:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 PM ----------

So to answer your question: It's not matter or simple mesh or texture with current orbiter graphics engines.

 

[Cras]

Yes, exactly. Now look up "deliberate lens flares" in your dictionary. "Professional cinematographer"... And not even knowing his trade.

And that just about sums up my thoughts on you as well I suppose.

 

[statickid]

Just to add some clarity to this conversation I researched the cited text and found the video in question. Spaceflight now is NOT talking about lens flare or "atmospheric effects" as in "atmospheric lighting and cinematography." No, it is quite literally referring to what appears to be a visual plasma flow or fluorescing gasses in the pressure wave. It could be related to sunlight, but my intuition says it is not, being that is very colorful displaying white, orange, pink and green.


article: http://www.spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts119/090315launch/

video, marked at the location of interest:
http://youtu.be/Mj2d8aGhqaw?t=9m42s

 

[4throck]

Relax. Most people that actively post on the forums are very direct, and speak their mind openly.

So opinions here are usually: it's pointless because it doesn't suit what I do in Orbiter.


On this case both views are valid.

Graphic efects make sense in exterior views or virtual cockpit, but not in the default hud + mfd views. That last view is the only one where your screen acts like a forward window into space. On the others, it is indeed simulating a camera.


Yet, personally I think that lens flares always look are a bit cheap... Probably because the effect is so overused :lol:

 

[ZacharyS41]

What about the "dramatic atmospheric effects that resulted in a brilliant ring of light ballooning, flickering and collapsing around the accelerating spacecraft" quote?

 

[statickid]

well technically orbiter already has plasma effects/generic shockwaves. I guess if an add-on developer were so inclined, they could code shockwave meshes in, but it would be totally up to the developer. An example might be the the way the DGIV has low pressure vapor effects on the wings when turning at high speeds.

 

[ZacharyS41]

I meant the shadow created by the shuttle if the sun is zenith towards the stack. I'm describing the actual Roll-to-Heads-Up maneuver.