Wow looks awesome can't wait
Gears of War 3: Brofisting to the End
- Thread starter Proelite
- Start date
Wow looks awesome can't wait
Well Gears games have had its fair share of no scopers, suffice to say no scoping in Gears isn't quite as easy as it looks.
The game does not use HDR though or have I missed something?
HDR tonemapping in photography terms, eg:
The way details and ambient colours in shadows really pop-out. You could see something similar in Killzone 3, and achieving it in Crysis wasn't hard with a few tweaks:
Sorry but that's totally wrong.
Gears actually goes for high contrast but they're careful not to clamp or burn out any highlights.
Not sure what the underlying tech is... also, KZ3 has nothing to do with HDR at all.
Oh and I absolutely hate hate hate what they're calling HDR photography nowadays, horrible.
Gears actually goes for high contrast but they're careful not to clamp or burn out any highlights.
Not sure what the underlying tech is... also, KZ3 has nothing to do with HDR at all.
Oh and I absolutely hate hate hate what they're calling HDR photography nowadays, horrible.
So,it Gears 3 uses HDR?
They probably still use the 7e3/FP10 format.
Heh, that image is funny, although what it actually shows is the effect of different exposure settings. Basically in photography you try to get the right level of exposition, whereas games usually go for an overexposed look.
Then there's the case of mixing images with different exposures, so that for example you can photograph a daytime interior in an apartment and at the same time avoid overexposing the outside.
But what I've meant with this "HDR" stuff is when they do these terrible post processing adjustments that basically look like a high pass filter. Probably the camera can store a float version of the image and they give away some silly software on a DVD.
The entire image gets flattened out because shadows and lit areas are equalized out. This basically sucks, IMHO.
Real tone mapping should just be about setting a low and high point based on stuff like a histogram and decide how to distribute the values in between using a curve.
Do I want overexposed highlights? Set the high point well below the brightest value in the image. Real lenses will usually generate some bloom on this image so maybe throw in such a filter as well.
Do I want lots of detail in the shadows? Set the low point somewhere close to zero luminosity.
Simulate a camera or pupil dilation? Avoid quick changes to the high/low values. And so on, and so on.
In real life you can either measure the light and set values manually, or use modern digital cameras to measure light on their own and use automatic settings. The tone mapping curve is either set by the manufacturer with digital cameras, or is the result of the film stock's chemical response to the exposure itself.
There's lots of stuff about it, I'm not even a hobby photographer so I won't try to explain it in any further detail.
Then there's the case of mixing images with different exposures, so that for example you can photograph a daytime interior in an apartment and at the same time avoid overexposing the outside.
But what I've meant with this "HDR" stuff is when they do these terrible post processing adjustments that basically look like a high pass filter. Probably the camera can store a float version of the image and they give away some silly software on a DVD.
The entire image gets flattened out because shadows and lit areas are equalized out. This basically sucks, IMHO.
Real tone mapping should just be about setting a low and high point based on stuff like a histogram and decide how to distribute the values in between using a curve.
Do I want overexposed highlights? Set the high point well below the brightest value in the image. Real lenses will usually generate some bloom on this image so maybe throw in such a filter as well.
Do I want lots of detail in the shadows? Set the low point somewhere close to zero luminosity.
Simulate a camera or pupil dilation? Avoid quick changes to the high/low values. And so on, and so on.
In real life you can either measure the light and set values manually, or use modern digital cameras to measure light on their own and use automatic settings. The tone mapping curve is either set by the manufacturer with digital cameras, or is the result of the film stock's chemical response to the exposure itself.
There's lots of stuff about it, I'm not even a hobby photographer so I won't try to explain it in any further detail.
Ignored again...
Anyways...
I thought FP10 gives you much lower dynamic range then FP16, RGBM or Logluv no?
uh... That's not the point... It's substantially higher than RGBA8. Call it MDR if you want.
Similar threads
