NZFF

Take a look at these, using Reshade and WOW! this is Epic.

https://imgur.com/a/RZp7hht

Wow. The line between virtual and real has now been lost. Impressive.

Indeed, my jaw is sitting on the floor right now. I've added a few more in there. More subtle changes.

[quote="cowpatz"]Wow. The line between virtual and real has now been lost. Impressive.[/quote]

Along with the other shader types also using the reshade "luna sharpen" makes the whole sim crisper without adverse aliasing as you will see in the album near the bottom, when you view them you'll notice the sharpness. All without even affecting my frames.

If you want to give my preset a go then you can download from here: https://mega.nz/file/nL4l2QqS#ZvfWoKMVI ... J8H177eScU

Thanks for the goodies Kelvin. Almost up and running with an upgrade on the rig. Wont be long :-) - Cheers

Some more FS 2020 in-game Screenshots

https://imgur.com/a/HF1lyQv

[quote="Sonnyj"]Thanks for the goodies Kelvin. Almost up and running with an upgrade on the rig. Wont be long :-) - Cheers[/quote]

I'm sure you're looking forward to it.

Oh my goodness ...again. That reshade is the biz . From the start, most of the MSFS screens I've looked at seemed not quite right (but still amazing)...they have a "milky" look, in my opinion....but not now.
Amazing how a little contrast tweek (if that's what it is) can change a shot.

Superb stuff.

Splitpin wrote:Oh my goodness ...again. That reshade is the biz . From the start, most of the MSFS screens I've looked at seemed not quite right (but still amazing)...they have a "milky" look, in my opinion....but not now.
Amazing how a little contrast tweek (if that's what it is) can change a shot.

Superb stuff.

Thanks again. Basically, a significant amount of sharpening and a touch of sepia to ever so slightly yellow the cliuds as well as a bit of bloom on the edges of sun facing clouds gives that bloomy glow that you see, other than that it's stock.

I'm actually surprised how much blur is applied at stock which makes everything all fuzzy and washed out. This sorts all that and without crashing the sim or touching my frames. We'll optimised.

Kelvin! Are you using the Reshade functions that are available via GeForce Experience with Freestyle - or have you managed to persuade the standalone Reshade to work with FS 2020?

[quote="Adamski"]Kelvin! Are you using the Reshade functions that are available via GeForce Experience with Freestyle - or have you managed to persuade the standalone Reshade to work with FS 2020?[/quote]

Well, in fact I've used both and actually had some reshade shades work with GeForce exp. There is a caveat, Nvidia excludes use of certain shades because of cheating in multi-player games and it seems this applies to MSFS 2020 as only a few of the reshade shades are activated.

All in all both methods work without dropping frames but only if basic shades are altered. Some just kill performance.

Thanks! Yes - I was aware of the "gaming" constraints, though I'm perplexed as to how/why MSFS gets classed as a "shootemup"!!

I'm particularly keen on using LUT tables to iron out possible scenery/palette inconsistencies. I've been working on P3D and XP11 LUTs to correct ORBX photoreal areas and would like to extend that to MSFS ... though I'm not entirely sure that it's necessary (yet)!

[quote="Adamski"]Thanks! Yes - I was aware of the "gaming" constraints, though I'm perplexed as to how/why MSFS gets classed as a "shootemup"!!

I'm particularly keen on using LUT tables to iron out possible scenery/palette inconsistencies. I've been working on P3D and XP11 LUTs to correct ORBX photoreal areas and would like to extend that to MSFS ... though I'm not entirely sure that it's necessary (yet)![/quote]

The struggle with MSFS is that the photo tiles don't all match so correcting based on a single area of tiles might work for those but not others. AI still has a way to go.

Kelvinr wrote:The struggle with MSFS is that the photo tiles don't all match so correcting based on a single area of tiles might work for those but not others. AI still has a way to go.

It's not so much the smaller blocks of tiles - it's when complete areas appear to use a different palette.

The worst example of this are with many of the ORBX photoreal (TrueEarth) areas, where the colouring changes a LOT between (say) the UK areas (TEGB) and USA (NCAL, Oregon or Washington).

I realise that each area may originate from different satellite data sets, but I'd have thought some post-processing colour correction to achieve some degree of standardisation could have been used <??>>.

*Anyway* with any luck MSFS simply won't have this problem, due to the way the scenery is generated ... who knows!!

I guess with the larger areas you're less likely to care too much as it won't be in your view when flying over an area. Its when you have one tile next to another when that would kill the immersion a little.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

Adamski wrote:
I realise that each area may originate from different satellite data sets, but I'd have thought some post-processing colour correction to achieve some degree of standardisation could have been used <??>>.

Aerial images are always going to be especially difficult, just because of the way they are made. The nice, tidy images we see on sites such as LINZ are already tweaked within an inch of their lives, just to get individual photos to align and match. The problem is that ANY adjustment to an image is actually damaging the image -- you already start with a limited colour/tonal range, so shifting it around throws away some information. That's why we use 16 bit RAW images in photography etc, in that you start with more information that you actually need, so the 'processed' image still has a good range of colour/tones. Aerial images are invariably 8 bit by the time we get them, but after the processing they've already have, probably closer to 6 bit.... So for Orbx to have a consistent range across different areas would mean a further adjustment, and loss of detail.

This can really be a headache, I normally aim for minimal adjustments, getting a project area at least looking visually ok. Then down the track I try to join it up with another area, and that's almost impossible.

I really don't know how the simulator does this, there does seem to be a consistency to it, while still retaining a bit of richness. However the quality is still extremely variable, of course, as the info they start with ranges from great to missing completely. Overall, it does an amazing job, but you can't always look closely -- that's one of the reasons why I love the grass, up close it covers a multitude of sins.

There's been a lot of discussion on development forums about how tricky it can be to match new imagery to the default, I haven't tried this yet, but from these discussions I'm not really looking forward to it. One small positive -- at least in NZ we have the LINZ data, not many places in the world have that sort of resource freely available.

I haven't tried anything to tweak the look of MSFS, as this is a slippery slope which I don't always come back from:) However even using Prepar3d v5 on my new system without access to PTA seems like a backward step visually, so I am on the lookout for the ultimate MSFS tweaker....