TES Skyrim 0.126

[ENBSeries]

Kris†a™
Вы уже затрахали меня с профессиональными рендерами, я моделлер и программист одновременно, знаю не меньше вашего в той сфере, в которой себя элитой выставляете. Профессиональных рендеров вообще не существует в природе, есть только профессиональные видеокарты, а рендеры кто какие хочет, тот и использует, что хардварные, что софтварные. Терпеть не могу необъективных людей, не можете придерживаться рамок игры и предложенных мною сравнений, разговор окончен, растеризируйте в своем профессиональном софте и играйте там же.

Yasen
[FIRE] категория настроек влияет. Если же поставили багофиксы на эти объекты, то не знаю что тогда, еще не тестировал.

jonwd7
AOMixingType other than 0 do not use realistic approximation. Skin of afro-elf can't represent indirect lighting in low dynamic range conditions and at such low light intensity as in that interior.

[jonwd7]

jonwd7
AOMixingType other than 0 do not use realistic approximation. Skin of afro-elf can't represent indirect lighting in low dynamic range conditions and at such low light intensity as in that interior.

"Realistic" is subjective. I am sitting in an extremely dim apartment, and if I stare at dark areas I can definitely make out what I consider to be ambient occlusion. The point of my post namely was that you argue that AO + IL improve skin, which they do not. AO either makes it black in the worst case, or does absolutely nothing, since with MT0 it only contributes IL, and no AO. And with IL values at 0 or 24+ there is no IL contribution to skin in normal cases.

In fact, I argue the opposite. In exteriors, with MT1 and 0 the AO can be a little dark, but due to high directional lighting, the number of light bounces should easily overcome these dark areas. In an interior, with low directional lighting, there is less intense lighting and less light bounces, and thus more ambient occlusion.

I think the threshold for MT0 is simply too high. Ambient occlusion should happen in much darker interiors than the screenshot I posted, which is an extremely bright interior.

The fact is that MT0 should not contribute only IL to interiors. If you really looked at the images you would see that with AO on but IL off, there is zero difference in interiors. AO appears just to be off with MT0. I had the AO values maxed, which should at least provide some kind of darkening. I do much prefer the look of MT0's algorithms, but it's very unrealistic for it to only affect IL indoors. Since there is low directional light intensity, how on Earth is so much light bouncing around?

[mindflux]

Kris†a™
Sure, but I meant in the context of Skyrim and ENB - in all honesty I don't see the point in posting stuff made with 3D modelling software. Skyrim is a real-time game with varying environments, not a modelling studio, and even though some of the underlying principles apply, it's frankly not very mature or fair to expect it to look the same.

jonwd7
Alright, it looks like there was a slight misinterpretation on my part - by skin lighting I meant character lighting, as that's what I consider more important. That said, nice work with the comparison images, but your interior lighting doesn't look very realistic - it's pretty static, and isn't there supposed to be a huge fire-pit in front of the character in that specific location? Your points may be valid, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect to have any sort of realistic character lighting in those conditions. Anyway, I'm not interested in getting in an argument, just merely stated what I think.

[ENBSeries]

jonwd7

And with IL values at 0 or 24+ there is no IL contribution to skin in normal cases.

Normal cases? You mean ldr of the game? No thanks.

In an interior, with low directional lighting, there is less intense lighting and less light bounces, and thus more ambient occlusion.

That's wrong. Low average intensity in such interior scene compensated by eye adaptation (i mean real world), as result indirect lighting is still very noticable (otherwise all sexy photos in dark rooms will be horrible like dolls). Ambient occlusion is approximation and it's must be applied only to ambient color which all games use, but ambient color (fortunately in skyrim and gta4 it have directions) good for exterior to represent light recieved from sky generally, which not exist in interior scenes. For interior ambient lighting is very low (bethesda set it), accordinly to amount of light reflected from walls. Low ambient - nothing to decrease by ssao, because my ssao is not shadowing like in other games. This is the most correct and realistic approximation of ambient occlusion, there is no other way to apply it correctly, you may dislike how result looks, but this is the fact. What you want to see by applying ssao in wrong areas is not ssao, but computations of light by indirect lighting with computing shadows at same time for each intersected ray, in times slower and harder to implement via dx9.

[Tonaran]

Признаюсь, еще с лета надеялся, что два моих любимых модмейкера - Кристина и Борис - будут работать сообща...
Борис, не мог бы ты рассказать немного о принципах четырех постпроцессов из enbeffect? Я имею ввиду не смысл каждой настройки, а сам код: почему их именно четыре, как каждый из них обрабатывает картинку и какого результата пытается достичь? Еще интересно, если добавить настройки цвета и усиления эффекта блума, то куда их лучше вставить: до или после блока постпроцесса?

[ENBSeries]

Tonaran

если добавить настройки цвета и усиления эффекта блума, то куда их лучше вставить: до или после блока постпроцесса?

Лучше до tonemapping, все таки это избавит с чрезмерным мучением балансирования под все виды погоды. А вот если код использовать из редакторов изображений, то в самом конце шейдера, перед return _oC0;, потому что многое работать не будет как ожидается или просто заглючит с значениями выше 1.

Борис, не мог бы ты рассказать немного о принципах четырех постпроцессов из enbeffect? Я имею ввиду не смысл каждой настройки, а сам код: почему их именно четыре, как каждый из них обрабатывает картинку и какого результата пытается достичь?

Это просто разные варианты tone mapping, кажется один стандартный (не запоминаю авторов, это уже гуглить), остальные из тех, что использовал в разных играх, затачивая под их освещение, то есть если не хватало цвета и контраста или наоборот. Один из них (если не забыл) это сделал компрессию на основе большого числа hdr фоток снятых в разных условиях, чтоб не возникало блеклости изображения и не оставались кислотные цвета от искусственного освещения. Еще один yuv сделал для нереалистичного рендера, но так руки не дошли написать код мультяшности, так что как пост процесс бесполезный. В принципе три первых подойдут для игры, все зависит от настроек enbseries.ini и погоды, проверены на hdr фотках.

Kris†a™
Бета 0.129 с лимитом ssspower 0.1-20.
Фак мой мозг. Я моделлер, а не модельер и не создаю cg art'ы.

[mindflux]

Kris†a™
Well said, I totally agree. I'm myself striving to make the gaming experience as immersive as possible, and while character lighting is extremely important I also need to make the environment look as believable as I can, and that always requires some sorts of compromises to achieve a pleasing all-around end-result with as few distracting elements as possible. Naturally focusing on one single target aim such as characters would require a wholly different approach.

[jonwd7]

jonwd7
Alright, it looks like there was a slight misinterpretation on my part - by skin lighting I meant character lighting, as that's what I consider more important. That said, nice work with the comparison images, but your interior lighting doesn't look very realistic - it's pretty static, and isn't there supposed to be a huge fire-pit in front of the character in that specific location? Your points may be valid, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect to have any sort of realistic character lighting in those conditions. Anyway, I'm not interested in getting in an argument, just merely stated what I think.

Sorry, I don't know what "static" could mean in still images of lighting comparisons. Not trying to be rude by this, just saying that if critiquing my lighting settings (which wasn't the point of posting them) then I would expect to be able to understand the critique. The fact of the matter is I have point lighting intensity set all the way up to 5 for interiors, ambient 2.25, direct 2.75. To me this is what has looked best over a number of interiors. The one thing I agree on Boris with is that the game uses incorrect values for many things. My settings look best to me, but this is compromising the inconsistent lighting intensities of the game. If I up the intensity, fires will look right, but candles will be far too bright. And also, like I've stated previously, in interiors both skin and the environment cannot look simultaneously accurate. The skin is far too dark in interiors, which Krista pointed out changed between ENB versions in a previous image comparison. If by "static" you mean flat, then yes, I have the bloom a bit high and the fog multiplier a bit high. This is for ambiance and a matter of taste. Though what I would say looks extremely flat is MT0, since it provides zero ambient occlusion, and actually REMOVES it with the IL contribution. The MT2 shots simply look much better and more realistic, except for on the character. There just is no good compromise between MT0, MT1, and MT2 for interiors.

Also, the camera is almost in the center of a point light source, so you're not going to be seeing many shadows from that angle. If we're going to talk about realism, a real camera in a real fire is going to mostly see the air being lit by the fire. (On a technical level, point sprites or light volumes usually get culled when the camera is inside the light's bounding volume)


The point of posting was that no matter what Boris claims to be "correct" (it is still going to be subjective when it comes to lighting a 3D game), is that MixingType 0 is effectively broken for interiors. Maxed out AO values will show zero ambient occlusion, yet maxed out IL values will blind you. This is far from realistic. With any lighting in any scene, maxed out AO values should have *some* effect. Even if the opinion of Boris is that AO is non-existent in interiors and that this is somehow physically accurate. All I have to do to prove this wrong is use a renderer like Maxwell Render, which is physically accurate, not subjectively "accurate" in Boris' case. And in the scene include a room with one dim directional light and a few dim point lights (candles) and you will see that "IL" (or in traditional renderers the bounce/radiosity intensity) is going to be low, and "AO" (rather the true physical representation of this phenomenon) is going to be noticeable.

Anyway, instead of just adapting what he feels is "correct" to fit the game he blames it all on Bethesda, which I'm tired of hearing to tell the truth, even though I sometimes agree with this sentiment.

[mindflux]

jonwd7
Sorry, English is not my native language - flat is what I meant by 'static'. Not meaning to be rude either, but it does look like your settings are slightly low on contrast and brightness, as is also evident by the large intensity values you're using. It's not really relevant here, but as for the lighting in general, you might be able to come up with more pleasing results by increasing contrast and brightness. With proper settings you can still achieve a soft, pleasing look with bloom I guess you're aiming for, but you will likely find that the results after post-processing is done are better. At least that's been the case for me, although I have done quite a bit of experimenting on various different approaches.

I have no issues with the skin being too dark in interiors, although let it be said that I need my interiors to be much darker than what's on your screenshots to be realistic in my opinion.

[ENBSeries]

jonwd7

All I have to do to prove this wrong is use a renderer like Maxwell Render, which is physically accurate, not subjectively "accurate" in Boris' case. And in the scene include a room with one dim directional light and a few dim point lights (candles) and you will see that "IL" (or in traditional renderers the bounce/radiosity intensity) is going to be low, and "AO" (rather the true physical representation of this phenomenon) is going to be noticeable.

Okay, let me ask then, could you render ambient occlusion with any software renderer in simple floor made from plane and small box on it? Any lighting is ignored and ao darkness will be near small box and floor at any conditions, because ao is just how much light is coming from infinity from all directions, occluded by objects. Inside interior scene each non intersected ray will hit walls/floor/roof. Any software render do not use ambient occlusion for computations, this is only extra rendering method, like drawing normal maps or specular maps only. What you call ao in maxwell (fr,brazil,vray,mr, etc) is just shadowed tracing of each photon. No bounces - direct lighting with shadows. One and more bounces - indirect lighting with "indirect shadows" (hard to call, but simpler to understand).