Jump to content

What is wrong with this picture?


Recommended Posts

The default aircraft are way too shiny on my pc and I can't find a way to get them back to realistic. Am I the only one seeing this? The Alpha layers are way too bright or something external has been tweaked too far. I can fix my own aircraft skins but the AI defaults are way off and certainly not realistic. Any visit to an airshow or museum might help in getting things back on track. Or maybe this is a design decision? Please advise.

 

452397004_prob2.jpg.be092e58a0be4b420b1dac8e860c222a.jpg

 

1290465808_prob3.jpg.b4451d6e5fd0776642c7620ffc660024.jpg

 

469042586_prob1.jpg.b1432c3a0e035fd0b9b40ba534e73fe2.jpg

 

Here is how I am having to adjust the alpha layers on an individual basis in order to get a decent image. This is a nightfighter but the one on the left even has a mirror like reflection on the side that is in shadow. How can this be correct on an aircraft that is a nightfighter? The alpha layer levels are way too bright.

y17.thumb.jpg.e7e2cebdc941ef1104a609a08c6f5220.jpg

Edited by SR603-Flowbee
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s sort of a design decision. The flat finish just looks dull even if it might be realistic. Modern air show warbirds are all glossy in a way I don’t imagine real wartime planes would have been. Some film footage does show reflections from the paint. But shiny just looks good in the game. 

Edited by SharpeXB
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Alan Wilson from Peterborough, Cambs, UK - Messerschmitt Me410A-1/U2 Hornisse ‘420430 / 3U+CC’, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=76681687

 

Here is a museum shot just to inject some reality to the point I was trying to make. Note the lack of insane levels of reflection even on clean aircraft of the period. Turning up the contrast on a black and white photograph does not denote reflection. This game is supposed to be a simulation afterall so why coat every aircraft in a cm of gloss varnish rather than learn to harness the alpha layer or else willingly pursue the goal of making it look like Starwars.

 

1755188063_Messerschmitt_Me410A-1_U2_Hornisse_420430_3UCC_1.jpg.018f88e5a352b84691172133dcf89e81.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SR603-Flowbee said:

Alan Wilson from Peterborough, Cambs, UK - Messerschmitt Me410A-1/U2 Hornisse ‘420430 / 3U+CC’, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=76681687

 

Here is a museum shot just to inject some reality to the point I was trying to make. Note the lack of insane levels of reflection even on clean aircraft of the period. Turning up the contrast on a black and white photograph does not denote reflection. This game is supposed to be a simulation afterall so why coat every aircraft in a cm of gloss varnish rather than learn to harness the alpha layer or else willingly pursue the goal of making it look like Starwars.

 

1755188063_Messerschmitt_Me410A-1_U2_Hornisse_420430_3UCC_1.jpg.018f88e5a352b84691172133dcf89e81.jpg

 

Very few museum interiors have recreated sunlight. 6500k daylight colour temperature light requires very specialist, powerful lighting and would be expensive to maintain. It would also fade the exhibit's paintwork. Thats why they appear so matt.

 

Personally, I think IL2 does sunlight better than anybody else in the business and I wouldn't change a thing.

 

Take a look at this. This is a new build/fully restored I16 in sunlight. The paint is matt olive, but still there is surface reflection. Flat pigment tech is very difficult and even modern aircraft struggle to achieve and maintain it.

Polikarpov I-16 Rata-Mosca | Wwii fighter planes, Fighter planes, Wwii  fighters

 

Polikarpov I-16 Type 24 Ishak - YouTube

Edited by Reggie_Mental
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The skins in BoX always have been way too glossy. From the very start. It has been discussed several times already. It was noted by the devs that change is not intended.

 

For what it's worth, hangar aircraft aren't the best reference, as hangars typically are a farily low light environment. You generally will see some low level surface reflection on the aircraft of the time when exposed to sunlight. However, clear and bright reflections that would be visible over long distances would mostly come from glass and other reflective parts, not the painted surfaces.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mannock's Rules: 12 - 

 

"If the day is sunny, machines should be turned with as little bank as possible, otherwise the sun glistening on the wings will give away their presence at a long range."

 

Perhaps it is the case that doped fabric is more reflective than painted metal? Or that what he is really seeing here, is not so much a bright reflection but a sharp and obvious colour change, standing out against sky or cloud?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wings glistening like that will stand out against a sky that does not reflect a lot, no doubt. Same way dark surfaces will stand out against clouds. But it's the size of the visible surface that counts here, or the change of colour, not the shinyness of the surface. This is also not the reflection that catches your eye from 10km or 15km away, it's just visibility. Same as commercial aircraft that are easily visible from the gound - they'd be much hard to see if the wings were vertical and their visible cross section one thrid of what it is. :)

 

Regarding increased visiblity with increased visible wing area, it is a visual flight rule to bank your plane sharply for a moment in order to increase your visibility if you find yourself in proximity to another aircraft (you don't already know about). Same principle, but used inversely. It's not related to shinyness of surfaces or reflections - it's (mostly) about the size of the visible area.

 

I don't think that WW1 fabric was more reflective than WW2 dural. It's the paint that matters, and I think there wasn't much change there.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is more how the wing is polished after the paint. I find the nature of the paint matters not so much. As long as you polish it, it will glare. That is why freshly polished museum exhibits are rather shiny, despite sometimes being painted in a dull color. A Spitfire wing glares in the sun as any other aircraft wing, regardless if it is doped canvas, wood or metal. In the end they all have the same kind of paint finish.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Reggie_Mental said:

 

Very few museum interiors have recreated sunlight. 6500k daylight colour temperature light requires very specialist, powerful lighting and would be expensive to maintain. It would also fade the exhibit's paintwork. Thats why they appear so matt.

 

Personally, I think IL2 does sunlight better than anybody else in the business and I wouldn't change a thing.

 

Take a look at this. This is a new build/fully restored I16 in sunlight. The paint is matt olive, but still there is surface reflection. Flat pigment tech is very difficult and even modern aircraft struggle to achieve and maintain it.

Polikarpov I-16 Rata-Mosca | Wwii fighter planes, Fighter planes, Wwii  fighters

 

Polikarpov I-16 Type 24 Ishak - YouTube

 

This is exactly the type of thing I would like to see in the game. That level of reflection is realistic and perfectly achievable within the game. However at some point it was changed to what we have now. I can make this skin no problem and will do so to make my point. It isn't the game that is the problem but whoever has made the choice to go OTT glossy.

 

To save time here are pictures of the default I16 skin and 3 shots of a custom skin where I have quickly created a balanced Alpha layer. I hope it shows what I mean.

 

Total gloss and wax - even soot and dirt look metalic on this Default Skin.

251019535_i16gloss.jpg.f1cbcbe354203f848531f4f8bb55e508.jpg

 

Adjust the Alpha Layer to look like the photos of I16 in the sun on this Custom Skin.

1313672390_i16nogloss1.jpg.cdb96e6a562d93cea218bf3a3446b099.jpg

 

314140388_i16nogloss2.jpg.cd9af85880e4cc03e0ceb37eab6100d8.jpg

 

1181022256_i16nogloss3.jpg.68b5accc19b159e223ffccb0608adea4.jpg

 

You can ignore the metal and scratches as they aren't the issue just an indication of the level of control available in game. Focus on the paint and reflectivity.

----------------------------

 

"At least they got rid of the 'wet look'. What we have now is much better than that."

 

Look at the default I16 Wing surface. Surely you can see the wave like reflection?

Edited by SR603-Flowbee
  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To simplify my point I've knocked up a skin copy of the original photo shown below, see photo (2). It still has a couple of differences but this is about reflection not skinning. I used my Alpha layer properly adjusted to reality and also, in the next photo (3) show my skin identical in every way but using the ingame alpha which I think is way off. If this doesn't show there is a problem then I'm stumped. I've also included a couple of ingame shots to show the outcome of a poorly adjusted alpha layer after the comparison shots.

 

A good quality photograph to start with. (1)

1922828973_i16photo1.jpg.5e456561b9a1f6dd8c975494cf94b65f.jpg

 

A skin based on the photo above. (2)

1197986474_i16skin1.jpg.b3becc27599dfa0a447cd1d5ec0a1743.jpg

 

Same skin as photo (2) but this time with ingame alpha. Note how the details get lost in the glare. So much in fact it looks like a different skin. It is identical in fact apart from the alpha layer which controls reflection. (3) 

81921826_i16alpha1.jpg.6cb84d2e0f4268647507ed70d39c1c12.jpg

 

Finally two screenshots to show what the issue is although I've already tried that earlier.

632884718_i16skinsample2.jpg.ba5353661e37907eee472a5f51c6f404.jpg

 

714369644_i16skinsample1.jpg.91c2ad380608b9a287142c3ad8e0f921.jpg

 

And that's it - end of Complaint and thanks for your attention. :bye:

Edited by SR603-Flowbee
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a compromise, as is everything in every flight sim. There are bright metal AC and worn out hack aircraft schemes. The shine isn't a deal breaker for me on flat camoflage but to get that right, the bare metal AC and bare metal parts would appear overly dull. It could probably be tweaked by the DEV's have already improved it significantly from EA and I'm fine if this is so far off the to do list as to be written on a napkin.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

346720626_i16skin3.jpg.9cfabfbb8b2d5f4dea642659369b32d4.jpg

 

No point wasting a perfectly good skin. There is the link to it.

 

It clearly shows that there is no compromise involved if wishing to display shiny metal along side matt paint. Also no devs had to tweak anything as the tools have already been made and supplied. All it takes is not pushing the Brightness/Contrast adjustment into the red zone unless you actually want to create rocket ships. Which was my original question - Is this a design decision (most likely) or does someone not know what the control actually does (least likely) ?  Either way the pictures show just how much detail is being lost and that the current skins are being pushed into something that is less realistic. Unless the photographs are fake news of course...  :o: :lol:

Edited by SR603-Flowbee
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2020 at 2:21 PM, SR603-Flowbee said:

 

452397004_prob2.jpg.be092e58a0be4b420b1dac8e860c222a.jpg

 

 

 

 


A question I have is, where is the tail gun for this He-111? It’s available for this plane on the 2 previous IL-2 games, but not on this one.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really agree with you here! This is something I've tried also to achieve in my Finnish skin packs. There should be some shine, but not as much as default alpha's have. However In your example it has just a bit too much matte... I mean that if you tone the alpha layer that much down, some weathering layers become too noticeable and start to look weird. -Ok, they can be fixed with the template, but I'm trying to say that not all defaults cannot be converted just with alpha layer.

 

Also parked plane could look dusty, but flying one should not IMO. But anyways, that Pic 2 is more realistic to my eyes too. And I do also believe it is a design decision... "Ooh, Shiny!" just works better with average Joe.

 

image.png.8e63ccaa58822bb49a8ba01cedebee15.png

 


EDIT:
 

On 1/17/2021 at 5:54 PM, SR603-Flowbee said:

You can ignore the metal and scratches as they aren't the issue just an indication of the level of control available in game. Focus on the paint and reflectivity.


Oh, sorry. Did not read this one through in time.

Edited by Hanu
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...