Expert visibility - contrast change dependent on zoom level

[SharpeXB]

3 hours ago, gimpy117 said:

I thought it was "worse" with a larger screen

 

so which is it sharpie?

 

enlighten us

 

Obviously some people (you included) have found a way around the issues many of us are facing. and seem to be fighting tooth and nail to keep your unfair advantage over people who do not have the magic hardware/software settings that somehow solve this issue. 

Why would a larger screen be worse?

 

I don’t have any magic settings. I’m running the game on a 32” 2160p display, Ultra graphics. 2xAA, Landscape Filter (I think this is basically Anisotropic filtering) on Sharp. Max everything else, clouds grass etc. SSAO and HDR On. Nvidia CP all set to default. Alternate Vis Off

No Mods

 

Frankly I don’t understand most of what’s posted above nor how anyone is evaluating the effects of those settings. I have only seen one video of something that looked like a definite bug with vanishing aircraft. But I haven’t seen this myself. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

10 hours ago, gimpy117 said:

but it goes to figure in a game where people stack 50:20 servers to fly 109's and beat up on inferior aircraft 

 

This was true back when allies didn't have much to chose from to fight back. Now with Tempest and P-51 there is an even playing field. Please stick to the subject.

 

7 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Frankly I don’t understand most of what’s posted above nor how anyone is evaluating the effects of those settings. I have only seen one video of something that looked like a definite bug with vanishing aircraft. But I haven’t seen this myself. 

 

That much we have understood.

 

The problems described in my first post are very easy to reproduce. Simply use zoom from max to min and back. The game in its stock form is simply not simulating realistic visibility. That is why people resort to all sorts of tricks - to actually see something. One shouldn't mod the game to do this, especially one that is focused on realism.

 

Two best tips one can use with spotting (that will give by far the best benefits if you don't want to mess about with Reshade and other gamma modifications) are:

1. when scanning for targets never use more than normal zoom
2. disable Antialiasing

 

Edited November 15, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[JG700_Benek]

8 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

I don’t have any magic settings. I’m running the game on a 32” 2160p display, Ultra graphics. 2xAA, Landscape Filter (I think this is basically Anisotropic filtering) on Sharp. Max everything else, clouds grass etc. SSAO and HDR On. Nvidia CP all set to default. Alternate Vis Off

No Mods

 

Can you record and post here a short video of a fighter contact lets say 4km in front of you and then zoom in to max and out to min on it? I think it would be good to see how this looks on your end, maybe the resolution helps here because the dot is made of more pixels than in case of 1080p or 1440p.

[SharpeXB]

On 11/4/2019 at 2:32 AM, [DBS]TH0R said:

Main focus of clips shown below is the abrupt contrast change dependent on the zoom level - sun reflections simply fade away if you zoom in to the contact you're looking at.

You’re getting this harsh transition because your antialiasing is turned off. Especially the situation with the wingman in front of you flickering. That’s the lack of antialiasing. This looks like what I would see in CloD since it’s AA didn’t work. I don’t see this harsh effect on my screen. When I zoom out the aircraft will fade away getting smaller but not abruptly vanish like that. I’m running 2xAA in 2160p

[[DBS]TH0R]

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

You’re getting this harsh transition because your antialiasing is turned off. Especially the situation with the wingman in front of you flickering. That’s the lack of antialiasing. This looks like what I would see in CloD since it’s AA didn’t work. I don’t see this harsh effect on my screen. When I zoom out the aircraft will fade away getting smaller but not abruptly vanish like that. I’m running 2xAA in 2160p

 

Woefully incorrect and already answered to this statement of yours on the last page.

 

FYI nVidia Image Sharpening is similar to what Multi Sample Anti-aliasing does. The effects of that can be seen in my first clip in the video -  contact perfectly blends in with the sky / background and is visible only when using max zoom in. This is where the inverted zoom effect from ALT spotting was truly a step in the right direction IMHO. Also, I don't believe a word it was a bug. Rather an attempt of implementing a scaling to this sim.

 

And none of that has anything do do with the abrupt contrast change shown in all other clips in my video here.

 

If incapable to understand what is being posted here and shown in the video, I will ask that you stop trolling my thread. Else I will be reporting all of your posts from now on.

Edited November 16, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[A_S]

 

go to 3:22 min .. silver skin .. whoop seconds later dark green skin - same bandit btw ??? sun reflections done wrong? thus disapearing bandits via background?

 

Edited November 16, 2019 by A_S

[[DBS]TH0R]

1 hour ago, A_S said:

 

go to 3:22 min .. silver skin .. whoop seconds later dark green skin - same bandit btw ??? sun reflections done wrong? thus disapearing bandits via background?

 

 

I do believe this isn't the same effect shown in my video. Reason being the one I showed was added recently (patch 3.201) to improve long distance spotting by adding sun reflections. End result is the abrupt contrast change dependent on the zoom level - thus solving one and introducing more problems with already bad spotting plagued with various blending and rendering issues.

 

The contrast change in your video above could be the reason of several factors. Two most likely culprits are the shadow (plane going darker) due to the rotating dogfight, and the other one being skin loading / unloading bug when switching view on and off target (most easily reproduced when spawning next to friendly aircraft on MP servers).

 

What we have currently is a flawed Expert visibility that makes for invisible / problematic / unrealistic spotting for a large number of players (myself included), and ALT visibility that solves disappearing planes dependent on zoom level and at the same features time ludicrous visibility rendering with ugly and unrealistic "ballooning effect".

 

Thus both are completely inadequate for the sim of this caliber. And I am quite positive that this is turning off large number of players away from the game. Which is a shame.

Edited November 16, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SharpeXB]

The fact that aircraft get smaller when you zoom out isn’t a bug. 

 

Absolutely the problem the OP is trying to describe in the video clip is caused by having the AA turned off. The pixels are not blending together so you get abrupt transitions between them. It's very clear. In the second shot where he is following the wingman you can see his wings flicker and vanish, this is because the AA is turned off. That artifact at longer range can cause a whole aircraft to vanish or cause it's reflections to pop in and out. This isn't a bug in the game it's just the choice of settings. 

Edited November 16, 2019 by SharpeXB

[A_S]

Zoom FOV is out of question to begin with for any benchmark.

 

Things have to be "tactically useable" without game-box or ps4 "tools" (zoom FOV). I know i know..the "excuses" why Zoom FOV is legit compared to real vision are endless.

If you ONCE fly Falcon BMS in example.. you KNOW what good visibility simulation IS.

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

19 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

The fact that aircraft get smaller when you zoom out isn’t a bug. 

 

And the fact they literary disappear / blend in on max wide zoom is? In what universe or sim that focuses on realism? Do tell...

 

19 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Absolutely the problem the OP is trying to describe in the video clip is caused by having the AA turned off. The pixels are not blending together so you get abrupt transitions between them. It's very clear. In the second shot where he is following the wingman you can see his wings flicker and vanish, this is because the AA is turned off. That artifact at longer range can cause a whole aircraft to vanish or cause it's reflections to pop in and out. This isn't a bug in the game it's just the choice of settings. 

 

False and incorrect. Again. This quote refers to the second clip in the video ONLY. Completely disregarding the main point of my video - abrupt contrast change dependent on the zoom level due to newly introduced feature of sun reflections off wings and fuselage. Then again, we have already established that you either cannot read or comprehend what is written on the subject. In other threads here and in other forums. AA might have helped a bit in that particular scenario, for all others - it makes things even worse. As confirmed by others here.

 

Before I do a followup video with AAx4, here are a few screenshots without AA and x4. Paused at the start of the mission, with 3 different zoom levels:

 

NV Image Sharpening ON | AA OFF

 

 

 

NV Image Sharpening ON | AA x4

 

 

 

NV Image Sharpening OFF | AA x4

 

  

 

Mission / map | Weather | Difficulty

 

 

 

Settings (in-game and NV CP)

 

 ... AA x4 on the second set of screens

 

 

Lastly, repeating the same false statement over and over again doesn't make it true. This isn't communism.

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R
NV Image Sharpening OFF | AA x4

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, A_S said:

Zoom FOV is out of question to begin with for any benchmark.

 

Things have to be "tactically useable" without game-box or ps4 "tools" (zoom FOV). I know i know..the "excuses" why Zoom FOV is legit compared to real vision are endless.

If you ONCE fly Falcon BMS in example.. you KNOW what good visibility simulation IS.

BMS has crippled your ability to see other aircraft in this or any other flight sim because it renders them roughly 2x the size of what you see here. 
That’s not a “bug” in IL-2 so the point is really off topic for this forum section. 
 

@[DBS]TH0R You should make a comparison video using 4xAA and all the Nvidia CP settings at default. That would be more suitable for trying to report a bug. And post a track because YouTube compression makes subtle visibility issues hard to see plus you would need the track for an actual report. 
 

Having your AA off also possibly confuses the perception of any issue as it’s the first thing I notice. If there is another problem it’s hidden to me by this effect. 

Edited November 16, 2019 by SharpeXB

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Having your AA off also possibly confuses the perception of any issue as it’s the first thing I notice. If there is another problem it’s hidden to me by this effect. 

 

First of all, who are you and why should I care?

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

@[DBS]TH0R You should make a comparison video using 4xAA and all the Nvidia CP settings at default. That would be more suitable for trying to report a bug. And post a track because YouTube compression makes subtle visibility issues hard to see plus you would need the track for an actual report.

 

Second, grasping for straws now maybe? You clearly have severe problems with understanding what is being posted.

 

I shall repeat myself to as many times as necessary before mods start removing your posts (again):

 

PROBLEM #1: YT compression doesn't affect the quality of the video posted here, i.e. the problematic effects are not affected by it when viewed at 1440p native. I've made sure of that before posting. The effect of "abrupt contrast change" is a result of the newly added feature to help with long range spotting without adding scaling (white dots in the video). The sun reflections are gone when you zoom in. Having AA on ON/OFF doesn't affect this problem the slightest.

 

PROBLEM #2: Zoom (max wide) makes for super small, pixel size dots which are near impossible to spot. Completely separate bug, that I've only touched on in this thread (but discussed to great details in few others). ALT visibility solves that at ranges under 10 km.

Edited November 16, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SharpeXB]

33 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 Zoom (max wide) makes for super small, pixel size dots which are near impossible to spot. Completely separate bug

That’s how your view is supposed to function in normal visibility. Very far away targets are eventually going to diminish in size and vanish with distance and/ or FOV. This is normal and not a bug. Every other flight sim and game behaves like this. 

38 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

Having AA on ON/OFF doesn't affect this problem the slightest.

Maybe everyone sees things differently but I think anyone else analyzing your video would notice the jaggies caused by have AA off. These jaggies are what’s causing the reflections and pieces of aircraft to flicker. It’s pretty obvious. And it’s an easy test to run a track comparison with AA set to 4x. Perhaps try that. Maybe it will fix your problem. 

[A_S]

5 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

BMS has crippled your ability to see other aircraft in this or any other flight sim because it renders them roughly 2x the size of what you see here. 
That’s not a “bug” in IL-2 so the point is really off topic for this forum section.

 

Not true.

 

First of all it uses the classical method (propably similar in IL-2, not sure) of displaying

- different detailed 3D models

- at different distances

 

called LOD levels.

 

basically, close up you would see a fully rendered jet (many polygons), but at - lets say 10nm - it would only be a tri-angle made of few poylgons. Why that is so?

Because of resources. No one needs to render or calculate a Hummvee vehicle i.e at 200.000 polygons at way waay out of the visible range (wink wink DCS).

Btw talking about resources.. 2048x2048 (4,194.304 pixes) texture tiles (for skins i.e) are more than enough, but sometimes you have the "more is better" peeps doing 4096x4096  = 16,777,16 !! pixels PER texture tile - and then they wonder about bottleneck, stutter and lag.. and poping up skins..

 

(side note: the distances at what ranges what models-details "swap" can ruin or make the game often (like outside of 10km nothing rendered at all (sounds familiar??) .. a side-note, because i worked in that area once).

 

Next:

 

Then BMS uses something called "smart-scaling". It is NOT just  a PURE x2 factor of the sizes, but an algorythm based on true visibility studies in order to compensate smaller or higher in that sense (unreal) FOVs used on screens. BMS is more concerned about the tactical aspects rather than the "selling hollywood graphics" - so to speak. FIRST - a simulator must FUNCTION in the very purpose it is made for, namely.. tactical useful trainings tools - allowing to recplicate aerial warfare and all its asepcts - maybe simplified in parts - but fundamentally loyal to its goal. The main things often get overlooked in a world of shaders, raytracing, poly-gon details and FX sandboxing...

 

The simplest things are often the hardest.. because a desk-developer may or might not have "aerial warfare aspects" and "principle understanding" in his "smarts". Similar to a Fromula 1 engineer not talking with the driver ... - if that makes sense.

Edited November 17, 2019 by A_S

[SharpeXB]

10 minutes ago, A_S said:

Then BMS uses something called "smart-scaling". 

Yeah yeah we’ve all heard about this.... dozens upon dozens of times. ?

This is the Technical Issues and Bug Reports section. The fact that IL-2 doesn’t use smart scaling is not a bug. 

[A_S]

I am not saying that..  i am trying to give, or look at alternative solutions in order to improve OUR beloved IL-2 airspace.

Edited November 17, 2019 by A_S

[SharpeXB]

4 minutes ago, A_S said:

I am not saying that..  i am trying to give, or look at alternative solutions in order to improve OUR beloved IL-2 airspace.

BMS smart scaling isn’t a good solution. It looks really terrible and draws the aircraft way out of scale. 

This is how far away from reality it is. No wonder people who play this have so much trouble in other sims. 

 

[A_S]

Now you are just "google quick searching" and "copy pasting",  and making hollow arguments without fully understanding them ..and even adding the assumption !!! BMS pilots are BLIND in IL-2   neh.. it iiiss BS assumption

 

This is not a who is right fight.

 

Clearly IL-2 uses its own method, but it is far faaaaaaar away from perfect, or even tactially, simulation-wise good ! Thus needs re-thinking and re-doing. Period.

Example.. two P-51s ..high aspect.. and 280mph (that makes 560mph closure) .. contact pops up with high aspect silhouette at (you tell me..?)  1 or 2km? That makes how many seconds till merge. Furthermore.. meantioned above and importantly saying it again: 

Visibility consistency within a WVR (within visual range) "Bubble" ? = Non existent.

Aspects like sorting, targeting, intercepting, engaging or seperations - especially as flight, wing or package (2-ship or more), almost impossible under currenct visibility conditions.

 

If what all you do is going high and "playstation 4 zooming" for pray.. (or worse "external padlock viewing bandits like possible on BERLOGA)  you will be fine..and can further self-celebrate in your stats and dont worry about realism

But even you may have had situations, where you commit to a fight (1v1) and missed visually the "OTHERS" being around so close all the time.. jumping on you after having waited for, that someone becomes vulnerable

Don´t worry..i can adapt.. but i would prefer doing air-combat instead of exploiding flaws of the game for victory and "scores". ..

BTW..is there ANY way to disable ingame AA and enforce it via nVidia gfx control panel in IL-2 ?  Help appreciated.

Edited November 17, 2019 by A_S

[SharpeXB]

43 minutes ago, A_S said:

Now you are just "google quick searching" and "copy pasting",  and making hollow arguments without fully understanding them ..and even adding the assumption !!! BMS pilots are BLIND in IL-2   neh.. it iiiss BS assumption

 

This is not a who is right fight.

 

Clearly IL-2 uses its own method, but it is far faaaaaaar away from perfect, or even tactially, simulation-wise good ! Thus needs re-thinking and re-doing. Period.

Example.. two P-51s ..high aspect.. and 280mph (that makes 560mph closure) .. contact pops up with high aspect silhouette at (you tell me..?)  1 or 2km? That makes how many seconds till merge. Furthermore.. meantioned above and importantly saying it again: 

Visibility consistency within a WVR (within visual range) "Bubble" ? = Non existent.

Aspects like sorting, targeting, intercepting, engaging or seperations - especially as flight, wing or package (2-ship or more), almost impossible under currenct visibility conditions.

 

If what all you do is going high and "playstation 4 zooming" for pray.. (or worse "external padlock viewing bandits like possible on BERLOGA)  you will be fine..and can further self-celebrate in your stats and dont worry about realism

But even you may have had situations, where you commit to a fight (1v1) and missed visually the "OTHERS" being around so close all the time.. jumping on you after having waited for, that someone becomes vulnerable

Don´t worry..i can adapt.. but i would prefer doing air-combat instead of exploiding flaws of the game for victory and "scores". ..

BTW..is there ANY way to disable ingame AA and enforce it via nVidia gfx control panel in IL-2 ?  Help appreciated.

It’s all been said before. Nothing new. And really off topic for this thread. Smart scaling wouldn’t fix the alleged problem being discussed. 

 

And no no I haven’t been able to use AA from NCP in IL-2. The last time I tried that though was back when the game was new, to try and increase it from 4x to 8x like RoF had. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

8 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

BMS smart scaling isn’t a good solution. It looks really terrible and draws the aircraft way out of scale. 

This is how far away from reality it is. No wonder people who play this have so much trouble in other sims. 

 

The same can be said about this sim. Far away from reality is what it looks like when you zoom out and the plane in front of you disappears almost completely.

 

After being subjected to the flawed implementation of visibility / spotting in this sim for so long, it is no wonder people like you have so much trouble understanding other, different and very often better solutions to simulating this. You being prime example of debating a topic that you don't understand at all.

 

 

12 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

That’s how your view is supposed to function in normal visibility. Very far away targets are eventually going to diminish in size and vanish with distance and/ or FOV. This is normal and not a bug. Every other flight sim and game behaves like this.

 

That is not how a view should function at all. Targets should not disappear with max wide zoom. Period. "It is not a bug, it is a feature" is not really an argument lol.

 

What stands out like a sore thumb is completely false statement "Every other flight sim behaves like this". No it does not. Else people wouldn't put this sim on a pedestal of terribad visibility modeling. Yeah, I know this is impossible for you to understand.

 

 

12 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Maybe everyone sees things differently but I think anyone else analyzing your video would notice the jaggies caused by have AA off. These jaggies are what’s causing the reflections and pieces of aircraft to flicker. It’s pretty obvious. And it’s an easy test to run a track comparison with AA set to 4x. Perhaps try that. Maybe it will fix your problem. 

 

Again, you are simply incapable of reading or understanding what was posted. The jaggies are there to help the contacts stand out in overall blurry background (huge problem with the sim).

 

The jaggies are not the reason which is causing sudden contrast changes and pieces of aircraft to flicker. Rather the new sun reflections effect that disappears when using zoom. AA ON/OFF doesn't affect this the slightest.

 

 

9 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

Yeah yeah we’ve all heard about this.... dozens upon dozens of times. ?

This is the Technical Issues and Bug Reports section. The fact that IL-2 doesn’t use smart scaling is not a bug. 

 

And we've had a privilege of reading your lack of understanding the subject in question, or the benefits cleverly implemented scaling could bring to this simulator. Because visual spotting is by far one of the worst aspects of it.

Edited November 17, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

8 hours ago, A_S said:

Clearly IL-2 uses its own method, but it is far faaaaaaar away from perfect, or even tactially, simulation-wise good ! Thus needs re-thinking and re-doing. Period.

Example.. two P-51s ..high aspect.. and 280mph (that makes 560mph closure) .. contact pops up with high aspect silhouette at (you tell me..?)  1 or 2km? That makes how many seconds till merge. Furthermore.. meantioned above and importantly saying it again: 

Visibility consistency within a WVR (within visual range) "Bubble" ? = Non existent.

Aspects like sorting, targeting, intercepting, engaging or seperations - especially as flight, wing or package (2-ship or more), almost impossible under currenct visibility conditions.

 

Seconded x1000.

 

8 hours ago, A_S said:

BTW..is there ANY way to disable ingame AA and enforce it via nVidia gfx control panel in IL-2 ?  Help appreciated.

 

You can do it via new nVidia Image Sharpening. It is essentially a better solution than in-game blurred sharpening that makes contacts blend with the background. See my ealier post here for comparison:

 

 

 

8 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

It’s all been said before. Nothing new. And really off topic for this thread. Smart scaling wouldn’t fix the alleged problem being discussed.

 

Blatantly incorrect / further evidence of not understanding what is being posted. Yes it would solve the disappearing contact when fully zoomed out. You just happen to badly not like that solution:

 

 

There are other versions of scaling that deal with zoom issues (BMS one does not).

 

Smart Scaling Demonstration - cleaned up for easier understanding:

 

Quote

2. Serfoss
This is the standard Smart Scaling algorithm that Falcon BMS currently uses. It's based on a paper from 2003 written by Gary Serfoss. It uses rough information gathered from pilots on the ranges at which aircraft should be spotted and identified, and then scales the aircraft up on a flight simulator dome so that pilots can identify virtual aircraft at the same ranges as real life.

The main drawback with this method is that it was finely tuned for a specific projector system and dome. It does not take into account either variable resolution, or a variable field of view, as both of these are constant in the reference setup.

3. Chihirobelmo
Based on the Serfoss formula, and developed by chihirobelmo, this is meant to address the two shortcoming mentioned above. The field of view and resolution of the screen are factored into the calculation to get roughly equal spotting ability no matter what the resolution or field of view. 

As a result, this also addresses some visual artifacts that arise from the static Serfoss method, such as being able to zoom into aircraft on the ground from 20k feet and seeing an F-16 as wide a runway.

4. Sanpat v1
Created by Sanpat, this method uses the Serfoss result, but then processes it to compensate for field of view and resolution. Its purpose is to specifically maintain the distances at which aircraft should be identifiable across varying FOV and resolution. In Sanpat's own words:

My equation is not about the size on the monitor of the objects. It is to maintain the pixel number require to convey information perceptible IRL by pilots as per Serfoss’ research. So if it 5px on 1080p it will be 5px on 720p. Of course 5px in 720p will be a lot bigger than in 1080p. 

It will make things bigger so the size will not accurate as it is not the point of smart scaling. The different in current BMS implementation and my suggestion is at higher resolution than 1600x1200, mine will be smaller, but it is still magnified if needed and will be bigger than IRL.

Serfoss’ curve is not linear and the size in arcmin is not the focus. The focus is for pilots to be able to tell object information such as aspect, attitude, etc, at the same level as IRL.

5. Sanpat v1 (Clamped)
Since the Sanpat formula generates very large scaling values in some situations. This is the above formula, but clamped to the reference Serfoss value. This means that if the Serfoss value is smaller, then it will use that one instead.

 

6. Sanpat v2
Also developed by Sanpat, this is meant to address the issues that his first formula has with high fields of view and lower resolutions, while also smoothly blending with the Serfoss value under certain conditions.

This way the new proposed formula can be used with the res and fov setting worse than 20/40, by dampening the curve within 1 nm. The curve will now start from 1 at 0 nm as is desired. From 1 nm, the object will still maintain the correct pixel number from Serfoss’ research. May be this a better compromise for the case of worse than 20/40 setup. 

The trade off and downside of this method is, while maintains constant detail level at a given range as per the purpose of Serfoss’ research, the size will varies. People with low resolution monitors will see bigger objects, etc. But for its purpose, this is correct as the better screen resolution the lesser the need for scaling.

 

Number 3 and 6 are most interesting. Anyone can download the SmartScalingDemo.zip from the article above and try different versions for themselves.

Edited November 17, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[A_S]

I might be wrong here.. but maybe they just took the "LOD swap-distances" and "multiplicators (scalers per LOD level)" from ROF and inherited it.

 

But with faster planes.. higher closures .. more turning-room .. more spatial conversions.. it does not work out so well in ww2 planes?

@[DBS]TH0R  thanks for finding and sharing this one    https://why485.itch.io/smart-scaling-demonstration

Edited November 17, 2019 by A_S

[SharpeXB]

^This is all veering way off topic from trying to report a bug. 

 

Personal opinions of the game’s graphics are not a bug. 

Whether it not this game imitates features of another sim isn’t a bug either. 

5 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 The jaggies are there to help the contacts stand out in overall blurry background (huge problem with the sim).

The background is blurry and jagged because you have AA turned off. Also try turning on the landscape filter, I think it’s basically anisotropic filtering which smooths out the flickering effect of the terrain. I noticed this effect more with the Arras map and the new visibility difference. This filter helps a lot. 

Edited November 17, 2019 by SharpeXB

[[DBS]TH0R]

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

^This is all veering way off topic from trying to report a bug.

 

No, you are continuously trying to change a topic by presenting false and incorrect facts, based either on ignorance or personal agenda. All of which are red flags for manipulative and fanatic behavior. The sooner the admin staff here realizes how much damage you are doing to constructive discussions on this forums by trying to water them down by throwing "off topic condescending curve balls" - the sooner will the development team have more accurate feedback with which it will then be able to improve this game we all enjoy.

 

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Back when this game launched it didn’t have any advanced graphic settings. Just the simple presets. Why? Because the Devs feared that if they provided players with too many settings that they’d screw them up and then overload their team with support tickets and bug reports.

 

More off topic. Answer: if having 4xAA would eliminate the problems with visibility in my video in first post here, then it is logical to assume the developers would lock that setting. Hell, it would have been enabled within the visibility changes recently.

 

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

I haven’t seen any documentation of a bug, just the effect of a particular player’s graphic setting choices.

Personal opinions of the game’s graphics are not a bug.

 

We have established that several times in this thread already. Why is it necessary for you to copy / paste so many times here the fact you yourself have not understood what the problem is?

 

Neither is forcing your own opinion over others as "more important" or "know it all" useful to this discussion. Especially when it doesn't have the facts backing it up, merely own personal agenda. What is worse, you are a minority in this thread.

 

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

Whether it not this game imitates features of another sim isn’t a bug either.

 

Where did anyone say that? We have merely listed options and different approaches to the well known issue. For which this sim is infamous for.

 

 

1 hour ago, SharpeXB said:

The background is blurry and jagged because you have AA turned off. Also try turning on the landscape filter, I think it’s basically anisotropic filtering which smooths out the flickering effect of the terrain. I noticed this effect more with the Arras map and the new visibility difference. This filter helps a lot. Like I just said above, you aren’t likely experiencing a bug, it’s just the effect of your choice in settings.  

 

Again completely false and incorrect. The game has blurry background. This is why some people prefer to use Horizon draw distance = 40km, as it gives them a better contrast vs. the background and eliminates the blur to some extent.

 

Having Antialiasing on doesn't affect that the slightest. In case of the clip you are so desperately clinging to from the video - it would only made the plane look nicer (without jaggies). It wouldn't have prevented it from blending in the background.

 

About that landscape filter, I am using "Blurred" option:

 

20 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

It does look nicer when combined with Image Sharpening from NV CP, as for the problems described here it makes no difference.

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SharpeXB]

@[DBS]TH0R Let’s clean up this discussion and stay on topic

I’ve managed to reproduce the problem clearly with a track. I’ll post it today. 

[[DBS]TH0R]

I am away from my PC for 48h. When back home, I will be taking a look at your track.

Edited November 17, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[A_S]

Ok.. AGAIN..i see this happening  . once noticed in a stream..now again.. The game definitly has a SWAPPING SKINS ISSUE .. changing skins randomly.. nothing to do with "sun reflections"

 

look 5:55min --  (now having seen this on multiple occasions, often even on the parking deck)

 

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by A_S

[[DBS]TH0R]

12 hours ago, A_S said:

The game definitly has a SWAPPING SKINS ISSUE .. changing skins randomly.. nothing to do with "sun reflections"

 

This definitely has nothing to do with sun reflections, as those were added to help with long distance spotting. This skin swapping issue is actually "skin not loading issue". Or better, "loading / unloading". I have this skin loading / unloading from day 1 with this sim. It happens when you move camera (view) off and back on target (plane) in question - at very close distances like shown in your video here. No matter the settings (both Nvidia or in-game) it is often there, mostly present during online sessions.

 

Like you said, easiest way to reproduce is on spawn points with planes around you - point your view at them, then back to center, and at them again. For a brief moment the plane will not show the actual skin selected by that pilot, instead it will be loaded / shown with a delay.

 

I am not sure at which ranges the swap or load / unload skin is happening. It might very well also play a role in all this... Especially during dogfights when your view is all over the place.

 

Sun reflections ON / OFF contrast change (main focus of my video from first post) is happening by manipulating with zoom levels - with contacts at long ranges, and not moving your camera OFF the contact you're viewing. Easily seen in the third and last clip from my video.

Edited November 18, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[A_S]

many issues it seems.. good to spot and report them all..

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, A_S said:

many issues it seems.. good to spot and report them all..

I saw the same thing and started a separate report on it. Looks like the reflections disappearing and reappearing to me  

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by SharpeXB

[A_S]

funny part.. i just flew on combat box with "balanced" for shits and giggles..and maybe placebo..but visibility was good

[LColony_Kong]

Another issue with contrast is that it would appear to be based on maps. I was flying TAW last night and as I have posted screenshots of before, the contrast against the ground on that map is so horrid that fighters have a hard time escorting bombers. I was loitering about 1-2km from a group of 3 planes and could only catch glimpses of them. I had to stay so focused on them with a extreme zoom to maintain track that I could not afford to even check my own six and was lucky I did not get bounced.

 

Lets just go through the laundry list of tactical things that are not possible in il2 due to the crappy spotting:

 

-Correct wing man spacing. (too easy to lose)

 

-Correct Group spacing. (too easy to lose)

 

-Escorting bombers (frequently completely disappear into ground, even when very close)

 

-Defending objectives (bombers can frequently slip past entire groups of fighters and the only alert to their presence is flak or the explosion of their bombs)

 

-Group Boom and Zoom (inadequate SA means you cant ever be sure enough of enemy or friendly geometry to do this)

 

-Multiple passes on Boom and Zoom (Too risky as you cant have any SA confidence whatsoever)

 

-General ACM (Extreme difficulty in AC ID, and inability to accurately assess the situation means that any attempt at this fails most of the time. It is an extremely common occurrence that only the flight lead might see a bandit and this makes it hard to coordinate anything. Offensively it means herding sheep onto target. Defensively it means nothing more complicated than turning as a group.)

 

-Checking your own six! Even this cannot be done right now in a reasonable fashion. It is so hard to spot a plane in profile even at close ranges that I check my six in game right now every 2 seconds even out of combat. I frequently fly just staring out the back of my plane. Despite this, because of the fact that high aspect planes are absurdly hard to see until about 800m, it is routine that planes just blink into existence at extremely close ranges despite constant attention to the 6 o clock. I have watched TONS of tracks where a plane made a six approach on me from high where I should have seen him several kilometers away except for the spotting. Instead, this plane was too difficult to see until he was basically in gun range.

 

 

[SCG_Wulfe]

1 hour ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

Another issue with contrast is that it would appear to be based on maps. I was flying TAW last night and as I have posted screenshots of before, the contrast against the ground on that map is so horrid that fighters have a hard time escorting bombers. I was loitering about 1-2km from a group of 3 planes and could only catch glimpses of them. I had to stay so focused on them with a extreme zoom to maintain track that I could not afford to even check my own six and was lucky I did not get bounced.

 

Lets just go through the laundry list of tactical things that are not possible in il2 due to the crappy spotting:

 

-Correct wing man spacing. (too easy to lose)

 

-Correct Group spacing. (too easy to lose)

 

-Escorting bombers (frequently completely disappear into ground, even when very close)

 

-Defending objectives (bombers can frequently slip past entire groups of fighters and the only alert to their presence is flak or the explosion of their bombs)

 

-Group Boom and Zoom (inadequate SA means you cant ever be sure enough of enemy or friendly geometry to do this)

 

-Multiple passes on Boom and Zoom (Too risky as you cant have any SA confidence whatsoever)

 

-General ACM (Extreme difficulty in AC ID, and inability to accurately assess the situation means that any attempt at this fails most of the time. It is an extremely common occurrence that only the flight lead might see a bandit and this makes it hard to coordinate anything. Offensively it means herding sheep onto target. Defensively it means nothing more complicated than turning as a group.)

 

-Checking your own six! Even this cannot be done right now in a reasonable fashion. It is so hard to spot a plane in profile even at close ranges that I check my six in game right now every 2 seconds even out of combat. I frequently fly just staring out the back of my plane. Despite this, because of the fact that high aspect planes are absurdly hard to see until about 800m, it is routine that planes just blink into existence at extremely close ranges despite constant attention to the 6 o clock. I have watched TONS of tracks where a plane made a six approach on me from high where I should have seen him several kilometers away except for the spotting. Instead, this plane was too difficult to see until he was basically in gun range.

 

 

The range and scale is as perfect as it's going to get in the current "expert" visibility setting. All these arguments about why things need to be re-scaled to make various tactics possible are silly because the current visibility range and size is realistic and therefore the current usable tactics are realistic. Inflating plane size leads to a loss of almost all tactics as you essentially know where everything is at all times. This is not realistic. If you've ever tried to track a far off plane in real life against the sky while repeatedly looking away to "check your six" you will see this is no trivial matter. It's akin to making everyone wear fluorescent pink in a military simulation fps because 'gosh-darnit, I should be able to plan all my movements while knowing where everyone is hiding.' 

 

That said, I will concede that there is a bug where planes are popping in and out of visibility at relatively short ranges.  This needs to be fixed and is clearly a bug or a reflection feature that is not working optimally. This is far and away different than suggesting the solution is just to make everything bigger. The size is not the problem, the contact disappearing while in sight at close range is...

Edited November 18, 2019 by SCG_Wulfe

[LColony_Kong]

1 minute ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

range and size is realistic and therefore the current usable tactics are realistic.

Nope. You keep saying this but it is objectively false. For starters, size CANNOT be realistic on a monitor without scaling things up. It is IMPOSSIBLE, literally physically IMPOSSIBLE for the size of something on your screen to be as large as it should be relative to the real world without scaling or some other mechanic designed for a similar effect. When you say this sort of junk you are dealing in counterfactual statements. "inflating plane size" is done precisely because it is one of the best ways to RESTORE game vision to a level where real life tactics are doable. It almost beggars belief that you can type on here with a straight face while making claims like this that are outside even the realm of possibility.

 

 

2 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

It's akin to making everyone wear fluorescent pink in a military simulation fps because 'gosh-darnit, I should be able to plan all my movements while knowing where everyone is hiding.'

No it isnt, and I can tell you from real life experience that troops in video games are much harder to see than they are in real life. Camouflage in particular is too effective. Spotting issues exist in games outside of flight simulation, and its absolutely screws with the tactics there as well. This is because it is IMPOSSIBLE for a game to have realistic spotting without some additional effort going into mechanics to alter the image from simple rendering. This is the exact reason why in games like squad you have people crossing danger areas 300m from an enemy position without being seen. This is exactly why in these same games the person with the binoculars herds their squad around like a bunch of blind sheep because they are the only person who can reliably pick out a troop in the open past 150m.

 

5 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

This is not realistic. If you've ever tried to track a far off plane in real life against the sky while repeatedly looking away to "check your six" you will see this is no trivial matter.

I have. Airplanes against both the sky and the ground are much easier to see relative to il2. In particular, they are much easier to REACQUIRE than they are int he game once they have been found. I have already posted several videos of planes against the deck being spotting from over 8nm, much easier to see than they would be in il2. A high aspect plane a couple of kilometers away does not look like two pixels like it does in il2. Relatively it is much easier to pick out than it is in this game.

[Barnacles]

32 minutes ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

Nope. You keep saying this but it is objectively false. For starters, size CANNOT be realistic on a monitor without scaling things up. It is IMPOSSIBLE, literally physically IMPOSSIBLE for the size of something on your screen to be as large as it should be relative to the real world without scaling or some other mechanic designed for a similar effect. When you say this sort of junk you are dealing in counterfactual statements. "inflating plane size" is done precisely because it is one of the best ways to RESTORE game vision to a level where real life tactics are doable. It almost beggars belief that you can type on here with a straight face while making claims like this that are outside even the realm of possibility.

 

 

 

 

I have. Airplanes against both the sky and the ground are much easier to see relative to il2. In particular, they are much easier to REACQUIRE than they are int he game once they have been found. I have already posted several videos of planes against the deck being spotting from over 8nm, much easier to see than they would be in il2. A high aspect plane a couple of kilometers away does not look like two pixels like it does in il2. Relatively it is much easier to pick out than it is in this game.

 

[LColony_Kong]

1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

 

I think you need to mock yourself with your own video. The size of the plane on the screen is not equivalent to the size of the plane in the real world. This is simple to understand you see.

 

Edited November 19, 2019 by [TLC]YIPPEE

[SCG_Wulfe]

16 hours ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

When you say this sort of junk you are dealing in counterfactual statements. "inflating plane size" is done precisely because it is one of the best ways to RESTORE game vision to a level where real life tactics are doable. It almost beggars belief that you can type on here with a straight face while making claims like this that are outside even the realm of possibility.

 

No it isnt, and I can tell you from real life experience that troops in video games are much harder to see than they are in real life.

 

I have already posted several videos of planes against the deck being spotting from over 8nm, much easier to see than they would be in il2. A high aspect plane a couple of kilometers away does not look like two pixels like it does in il2. Relatively it is much easier to pick out than it is in this game.

 

All you have managed to confirm for me is that you seem to have issues seeing everything in the virtual world, be it FPS or air combat. I agree a monitor is clearly not a one-to-one scale with the real world. I never said it was. (hint - it's already been adjusted and inflated on screen to achieve this affect) I said that the current implementation on a monitor of plane scale and spotting ability is about as perfect as it's gonna get vs the real world based on my real world experience of seeing planes in the sky while flying a plane. This has also been stated by a real life pilot on the dev team for goodness sake! 

 

I also have real life experience as a soldier and if you think seeing guys in video games is harder than it real life I really start to understand the issue here. You are struggling to see in all video games it seems. I've seen people sneak through the weeds up to 10 feet from a spotter who was looking for them without being seen. I go hunting and often don't see a deer in the woods until I'm right on it and it jumps up and runs. I excelled in my field and have recently tested vision that is better than 20/20. Spotting planes, people, animals, is a skill - not a given and it's hard, making it trivial completely removes any authenticity from the experience. 

 

I watched your videos... I couldn't pick out the planes in the videos on the first 3 watches through...

 

If we want to come together on something to actually get the devs to solve the issues... it's the fact that planes are de-facto disappearing at ranges under 5km while looking straight at them. This is a bug and needs to be solved. We are never gonna get agreement from the majority of the community that inflating the planes to an even larger size is the solution.

Edited November 19, 2019 by SCG_Wulfe

[[DBS]TH0R]

Gentlemen, please lower your emotions and provide examples of what it looks at on your system. That is the ONLY WAY for the developers to do anything. Bickering and throwing names around isn't helping anyone, and will end up with the thread being locked.

 

19 hours ago, [TLC]YIPPEE said:

-Escorting bombers (frequently completely disappear into ground, even when very close)

 

-Defending objectives (bombers can frequently slip past entire groups of fighters and the only alert to their presence is flak or the explosion of their bombs)

 

-Group Boom and Zoom (inadequate SA means you cant ever be sure enough of enemy or friendly geometry to do this)

 

-Multiple passes on Boom and Zoom (Too risky as you cant have any SA confidence whatsoever)

 

-General ACM (Extreme difficulty in AC ID, and inability to accurately assess the situation means that any attempt at this fails most of the time. It is an extremely common occurrence that only the flight lead might see a bandit and this makes it hard to coordinate anything. Offensively it means herding sheep onto target. Defensively it means nothing more complicated than turning as a group.)

 

-Checking your own six! Even this cannot be done right now in a reasonable fashion. It is so hard to spot a plane in profile even at close ranges that I check my six in game right now every 2 seconds even out of combat. I frequently fly just staring out the back of my plane. Despite this, because of the fact that high aspect planes are absurdly hard to see until about 800m, it is routine that planes just blink into existence at extremely close ranges despite constant attention to the 6 o clock. I have watched TONS of tracks where a plane made a six approach on me from high where I should have seen him several kilometers away except for the spotting. Instead, this plane was too difficult to see until he was basically in gun range.

 

I have removed the first two statements from the quote as I do not agree with them since I fly formation very often and have lots of experience with it in flight sims.

 

I do agree with the rest (quoted) though.

 

 

16 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

All you have managed to confirm for me is that you seem to have issues seeing everything in the virtual world, be it FPS or air combat. I agree a monitor is clearly not a one-to-one scale with the real world. I never said it was. I said that the current implementation on a monitor of plane scale and spotting ability is about as perfect as it's gonna get vs the real world based on my real world experience of seeing planes in the sky while flying a plane. This has also been stated by a real life pilot on the dev team for goodness sake! 

 

One pilots opinion isn't reliable. You need lots of them. The problem with spotting in this sim lies with he fact zoom isn't taken into consideration, yet many people use it and it definitely affects how one can spot stuff around - try increasing zoom to wide view and enjoy pixel hunting (fist two clips from my video).

 

In short, it isn't perfect, it is flawed with many problems. I am not saying scaling is the only way to solve them, just using it as an example.

 

 

16 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

I also have real life experience as a soldier and if you think seeing guys in video games is harder than it real life I really start to understand the issue here. You are struggling to see in all video games it seems. I've seen people sneak through the weeds up to 10 feet from a spotter who was looking for them without being seen. I go hunting and often don't see a deer in the woods until I'm right on it and it jumps up and runs. I excelled in my field and have recently tested vision that is better than 20/20. Spotting planes, people, animals, is a skill - not a given and it's hard, making it trivial completely removes any authenticity from the experience.

 

No one is saying the spotting should be easy. Merely not impossible as it is for some of us here. And comparing spotting in the woods with planes isn't really comparing apples and apples TBH.

 

 

16 minutes ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

I watched your videos... I couldn't pick out the planes in the videos on the first 3 watches through...

 

If we want to come together on something to actually get the devs to solve the issues... it's the fact that planes are de-facto disappearing at ranges under 5km while looking straight at them. This is a bug and needs to be solved. We are never gonna get agreement from the majority of the community that inflating the planes to a larger size is the solution.

 

I am assuming you watched my video in the first post?

 

Fully agreed that the planes are disappearing within 5 km bubble. And this needs to be solved as it is impacting the game play in negative way.

 

If I have to choose between pixel hunting on wide zoom vs. slightly enlarged planes like we have sub 10km in ALT visibility - I will take the latter any day of the week. If only we could lose the long distance overblown "balloon effect"

Edited November 19, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[SharpeXB]

17 hours ago, SCG_Wulfe said:

I will concede that there is a bug where planes are popping in and out of visibility at relatively short ranges.  

Is this what you are seeing? As much as I can see here it’s the reflections and not the skins vanishing.

 

[SCG_Wulfe]

34 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Is this what you are seeing? As much as I can see here it’s the reflections and not the skins vanishing.

 

 

Your video in that topic is blocked for me says I'm not authorized to view.

But yes, it is quite possible that what I am seeing is the reflection vanishing suddenly resulting in a contact seeming to go invisible.

Though from video others have posted here, it seems the contact also can vanish absolutely and I can't discern anything to be there at all according to the video footage.