TES Skyrim

[wolfgrimdark]

@OhKay - What can I say? Your shots are always amazing!

@Orphennoc - those are some great shots of the mature and old looking warrior, very nice.

@Pastranan - some wonderful landscape and nature shots in your preset.

@Far327 - Except I was not using down sampling for those shots at all. However I did increase SSAO to maximum settings (extreme) and increased scale and ranges to 1.0. Actually I went through the entire enbseries.ini and increased overal quality as much as I knew how. W/out down sampling I lad about 25 FPS I was able to invest in other areas so I dumped the points into quality. Not sure if that made images darker or it has something to do with my PC. I don't use any exterior weather/lighting mods besides Relighting Skyrim and now and then I uswe JawZ ELE suite - however these pictures were taken with just Relighting Skyrim which is mainly interior and mainly fixes broken vanilla lighting.

@Aal - Fantastic images, really enjoy your shots!

@symphonicjohn - Thanks, been getting a lot of practive in lately with both ENBs and doing shots. As I have said a few times your preset is just amazing and I can't get over how cool your shots look, just something about them I really like.

@Saltr - Another one of my favorite presets. I saved that image of the man next to the barrel with the vine behind him. SOmethign about that shot was just awesome.

So many good shots and so hard to keep up and comment but really enjoy coming here now and then for inspiration

Randoms:

[piwi]

[Confidence-Man]

A few overcast pics.


Wish there was a way to blend the water line into the fog cloud layer.

[WoodsOfYpres]

Confidence-Man
Brilliant! Is your distant terrain (especially the mountains) all vanilla? Your mountains look the way snowy mountains should look like imo. My mountains are a bit too "rocky" for my taste.

[symphonicjohn]

saltr, piwi, aal, Thank you Yes, some of those were just with the right lighting at the right moment. I wish they would happen more often

[piwi]

This Ass...

nice screens !!!! you start the year well

[thejokerz1]

Thank you aal for the links!

http://i.imgur.com/AykRGIN.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/dg3mvzM.jpg

Those are the best 2 I have ever taken but no where near as good as you guys.

[OhKay]

thanks and HAPPY NEW YEAR guys... F@#$ my head is still spinning... just woke up and tweaking for a little while!
some normal stuff as usual

3AMt
don't know if it supposed to turn out like this but here's my couple of shots






Here's Downsampling of 5120x2880. SizeScale and SourceTexturesScale at 0.3, <5 fps...






same as above but both Scales at 1.5... <1-2 fps...



its the same setting, just changed clothing

[jrista]

Good God. The foreground detail and shading here is AMAZING!! The grass, ground, and mammoth skull are just exquisite. How did you do that?

[jrista]

thanks and HAPPY NEW YEAR guys... F@#$ my head is still spinning... just woke up and tweaking for a little while!
some normal stuff as usual

3AMt
don't know if it supposed to turn out like this but here's my couple of shots

You can definitely see the reflections of the local static objects. Interesting...I wonder if the "enter map" requirement will be eliminated at some point.

Here's Downsampling of 5120x2880. SizeScale and SourceTexturesScale at 0.3, <5 fps...

...

same as above but both Scales at 1.5... <1-2 fps...

LOL. 5k really does kick the crap out of a system, doesn't it!

Here is a tip...I've been messing with this myself to see if I can improve performance at that resolution: Reduce SSAO/SSIL SamplingQuality and SamplingPrecision to 1 and 2 respectively, with SamplingRange at 0.3. (Personally, I kind of like a slightly lower sampling range, rather than a massive one like 1.0, as it kind of heightens the effect, rather than blurring it across a wide area...but using 0.3 specifically is part of the trick here.) With SamplingRange at 0.3, the difference between SamplingQuality at -1, 0, and 1 is practically negligible. If you SCRUTINIZE, you can see the difference, but when you are downsampling, the differences are moot (i.e. once you scale 5120x2880 down to 1920x1080, you plain and simply cannot tell the difference.) SamplingQuality 1 is MUCH faster than SamplingQuality -1, and still measurably faster than 0. SamplingPrecision has a minimal impact on IQ, but a very considerable impact on performance, as it is ramped up to higher quality. Again, if you scrutinize with a static scene when switching between -1 and 2, you can see the slight difference with SamplingPrecision, but once you downsample, the difference becomes negligible.

Overall, you can gain a considerably greater performance benefit by dropping SamplingQuality and SamplingPrecision, one that can far outpace reducing SizeScale/SourceTexturesScale to pitifully low levels like 0.3. I would offer that reducing quality & precision @ sampling range 0.3 offers enough of a performance benefit that you could keep SizeScale at 0.8, maybe even 1.0, and still have around the same performance as SizeScale 0.3. I would also offer that the difference in final quality is LESS when dropping quality and precision than it is when dropping SizeScale by such a considerable amount, with a greater performance benefit. There are indeed differences (and I don't recommend using SamplingQuality 2...you can tell the difference when its that low), but they are very small. Here is a quick (and very dirty) example of the technique applied: 5120x2880 @ 10.5fps:

Downsampled to 1920x1080p:

http://i.imgur.com/7q8tGnb.jpg

Click it for the original full size (warning, 3.3MB image, its really huge).