HDR lighting

[Dark SudoNix 1]

i have dual 8600 gt 4bg corsair 800mhz ram and dual core... im not complaining for my own accord... i dont like HDR either... i dont want to play a game like arma in the aspect of looking through a camera lens... the HDR in arma is not very good... lets just all agree on that... at least that is my oppinion and i believe others would agree

[Pyronick 21]

i have dual 8600 gt 4bg corsair 800mhz ram and dual core... im not complaining for my own accord... i dont like HDR either... i dont want to play a game like arma in the aspect of looking through a camera lens... the HDR in arma is not very good... lets just all agree on that... at least that is my oppinion and i believe others would agree

HDR isn't really simulating a camera lens, blooming effects and sun corona's do that.

It basically gives you a wider range of light, it's just the way it's implemented to give you a camera lens effect.

Currently it blurs out everything, but when correctly implemented it could make the game actually much sharper.

Only until we all have OLED monitors, will HDR rendering truely work.

Nobody complains about HDR in Crysis or Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway.

[Dark SudoNix 1]

i just meant in arma itself

[Pyronick 21]

i just meant in arma itself

In that case I just hope they'll use at least 96-bits or hopefully 128-bits High-Dynamic Range rendering to make it look more crisp.

I believe ArmA has 64-bits High-Dynamic Range rendering.

[LJF 0]

Sorry to revive an old thread but really, the HDR is one of the things that annoys me most. During the day you can never have something "dark", it always "adjusts" until the image is super-bright and bloomed until it's almost white.

I was playing on my jungle map the other day and it was almost unbearable: in a jungle with almost no light everything was brighter than it would be in full sun. Same in buildings: everything gets much too bright.

I love HDR, but can it be toned down a bit? When you're somewhere dark it should actually be dark. I'd like them to simulate real eyes instead of the cheap digital cameras the A2 soldiers apparently look through all the time :D There should be times when you have trouble seeing because you're in a really dark room or deep forest.

[Dwarden 1125]

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/arma2.cfg#Example

try increase HDRprecision (beware performance drop ;) ) to improve HDRi

[LJF 0]

I tried it but didn't notice much of a difference. This is what I mean:

Keep in mind that's 7:45, no sunlight with a solid canopy above, it should be quite dark like the first image, however the HDR just washes everything out. The first actually looks quite dark against the HDR version above, in-game it seems about right.

[kklownboy 43]

HELP

Just turn it up to 32. Or at least 16. Set your Gama and Brightness lower. When you "zoom" in it will lighten up, but "normal" view will be... normal. Oa has made HDR te awesome for me...

[CarlGustaffa 4]

From a photographers standpoint, that's exactly what I would expect with all automatics enabled. I mean, that's how exposure selection works. In photography we have to use EV compensation (or manual exposure) to get that underexposed look, which may or may not look like what the eyes are seeing. If camera producers "can't get it right" (the exposure and light evaluation algorithms), I don't expect a game to do it either.

My tiny suggestion contribution, but may not be feasible:

Instead of analyzing the current image (as the player sees it), analyze using a very wide (maybe 160°) image of less light points (a camera's light meter is forward looking and only have less than 1000 "pixels" to evaluate). If you always measured pixels at 120° (regardless of zoom or in scope), the exposure wouldn't keep changing too much. Maybe this gets too static, I don't know.

Evaluate based only on shading/lighting amount (and any emmissive sources, as it's the only way for lights and sun to cause you a "problem"), instead of of the full shaded view, where pixel/texture color is also taken into account. So if you have a dark object, it will still appear dark. If you have a bright object, it will still appear bright. Which is what our brain/eyes would do, but not a camera. The exposure will remain the same. Change the amount of light that falls onto that object (or by amount of reflectance to the viewer), now the exposure changes.

In photography, as mentioned, automatics often go wrong, and we have to compensate or go fully manual to get the shot right. The above is for the photographer achieved using a neutral greyboard to take their light readings from (or more commonly, check the testshot and adjust).

Cost? Most likely. The scene will have to be rendered twice. One time for the player camera at normal resolution, and one time for the light meter at extremely low resolution where texture color isn't considered. Could probably use low poly models as well, fire geometry maybe?

This is naturally nothing but speculative. I wouldn't know if it "worked" in a timely enough fashion without trying it.

[NeMeSiS 11]

From a photographers standpoint, that's exactly what I would expect with all automatics enabled. I mean, that's how exposure selection works. In photography we have to use EV compensation (or manual exposure) to get that underexposed look, which may or may not look like what the eyes are seeing. If camera producers "can't get it right" (the exposure and light evaluation algorithms), I don't expect a game to do it either.

Yet ArmA2 is the only game i know where this happens. :rolleyes:

[CarlGustaffa 4]

But are they taking the evaluative approach (working like a camera)? Other games are corridor shooters, and can probably setup "HDR zones" with specific multipliers. No other games have the sheer size required to force evaluative exposure selection. I could be wrong here. Maybe they are already evaluating dynamically, but something else than the finished picture, like my suggestion? Feel free to state which games that are doing this perfectly, and also please inform on how it (appears to) work.

I guess we could use something like ambient parameters, like i.e. forest*(1-hill)*HDR or whatever, but I'm expecting more problems with that. I.e. what is a forest? A wineyard or a dense jungle? How about the ambient parameter houses? By entering a village it now becomes darker? Doesn't work well either. I don't think it is realistic to ask for a corridor map, at least not for a patch.

I seem to remember Arma1 (also in JCove Lite) being somewhat zone based. At least there were certain buildings and floors that were highly problematic. There was nothing special about their texture brightness, yet it caused the HDR to go completely bananas :p Those baddies are at least gone now (a lot worse than a brighter than normal forest).

[NeMeSiS 11]

But are they taking the evaluative approach (working like a camera)? Other games are corridor shooters, and can probably setup "HDR zones" with specific multipliers. No other games have the sheer size required to force evaluative exposure selection. I could be wrong here. Maybe they are already evaluating dynamically, but something else than the finished picture, like my suggestion? Feel free to state which games that are doing this perfectly, and also please inform on how it (appears to) work.

In HL2 (Updated) its quite nice but a bit too subtle as it doesnt effect gameplay too much. However it still allows for dark area's during daytime, which is impossible in ArmA2. Also, it doesnt light up everything when you look at the ground.

I like how it effects the gameplay in ArmA2, however as demonstrated above it is just too much and i am willing to give up some of its effectiveness in exchange for less oddness.

Its effective range should be smaller, right now it seems to adjust it too much. It should just stop at a certain point and keep it too dark to see properly. Like in real life, and like it currently does at night.

Edited October 26, 2010 by NeMeSiS

[wipman 1]

Hi, this is the only way of deal with the horrible game's HDR that i've found.

- GTD HDR Mod.

The HDR on the ArmA2 seems to recreate the way that a photos camera work, and not how the human eye works; that's why is so bad and that's why it makes more harm than good, with that mod... you can make adjust it yourself ingame to be able of see something on circumstances where the default's game HDR will not allow you to see anything or just to see right.

Silly games like the BC2 have a good HDR, thousands of times better than the ArmA2, in comparison... the ArmA2 HDR is really bad made and as it don't works like the human eye (that's something that the BC2 do) then it becomes another NME to fight with. Try that mod if you can't stand the default ArmA2 HDR. Let's C ya

[CarlGustaffa 4]

GTD may be the solution for some, but for me having to manually expose all the time isn't my idea of (at least) a good solution. It would be like having to adjust my pupil opening with a remote control everytime I go into a house :p

The really unfortunate thing is that all we have is setAperture. There is no getAperture or calculateAperture (expected result from setAperture -1, when setAperture is fixed to something else). With that we could do proper sunglasses, or make better addons that tries to go beyond manual exposure. I don't know. Nice to have, thats all :p

[NeMeSiS 11]

GTD may be the solution for some, but for me having to manually expose all the time isn't my idea of (at least) a good solution. It would be like having to adjust my pupil opening with a remote control everytime I go into a house :p

I agree, while i think the HDR is far from perfect i do not think that it is so broken that i actually bother with manually adjusting it all the time. :p

[LJF 0]

Even if the effects were diminished it would be good. Your eyes do adjust to the light, however it is nowhere near what A2 does, and it is certainly a lot less noticeable.

[Cookieeater 10]

ArmA 2's HDR lighting needs to have a major overhaul. Right now it's simulating a camera's HDR, when it should have human standards. The best option would be to have exposure adjustment to light as fast as it is right now, while exposure adjustment to darkness be much more slower as in 40 seconds to see in the darkness at night time after wearing night vision goggles.

[max power 21]

ArmA 2's HDR lighting needs to have a major overhaul. Right now it's simulating a camera's HDR, when it should have human standards. The best option would be to have exposure adjustment to light as fast as it is right now, while exposure adjustment to darkness be much more slower as in 40 seconds to see in the darkness at night time after wearing night vision goggles.

So your big suggestion for its 'major overhaul' is to make it slower to adjust at night time?

:clap:

[Cookieeater 10]

So your big suggestion for its 'major overhaul' is to make it slower to adjust at night time?

:clap:

Or in dark spots, more realistic then being able to see in the dark after 5 seconds.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

I wouldn't mind a minute delay for the sake of realism (takes longer to develop good night vision), but I think many would. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't do anything for this issue though, which is a tendency to try expose for available light (which a camera does).

Would a more excessive limiter work? Or a limiter based on ambient parameters? Still fear it would bring down "unfavorable lighting conditions" too much. Not 100% realistic to the situation, but there are times in real life when harsh lighting conditions makes life suck. Like driving uphill in rain on wet asphalt, towards the sun, tends to drive me mad from blindness...

[NeMeSiS 11]

Would a more excessive limiter work? Or a limiter based on ambient parameters? Still fear it would bring down "unfavorable lighting conditions" too much. Not 100% realistic to the situation, but there are times in real life when harsh lighting conditions makes life suck. Like driving uphill in rain on wet asphalt, towards the sun, tends to drive me mad from blindness...

Well, making forests darker would make the game (slightly) more difficult, as well as more realistic. Currently the HDR system actually makes it easier because the brightness increases so much.

[LJF 0]

Well, making forests darker would make the game (slightly) more difficult, as well as more realistic. Currently the HDR system actually makes it easier because the brightness increases so much.

Exactly, although this is offset by how unbearably horrible it looks, making you turn away from the screen and subsequently get shot/mauled by zombies.

I have some pretty thick jungle about 300m away from my house and I can tell you it's quite dark in there, and if it's raining you'd be forgiven for thinking it's twilight.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Well I've played around with it a little, just to see if I could come up with something. The basic ideas are:

1) Turn off HDR automatic exposure control, by setting values based on a calculation.

2) Aperture will vary depending on suns altitude. At night, we have 0.5, at day we have around 40 as narrowest opening.

3) Overcast causes (on the jungle island I tested with) a significant drop in vanilla sceneBrightness. It becomes very dark. It's the HDR system that makes it bright again. Without HDR active I have to compensate for weather by letting more light through.

4) Use color correction to increase especially contrast during the day, but during bad weather this is flattened considerably. A rainy overcast with some fog is dark and kinda spooky. Contrast is also reduced during the night. Forget movie lighting, it's more fake than most think.

5) Color correction is also used to cause a slight tint towards green during the day, as if sunlight passes through green leaves and bounces off green grass. At night, this changes into bluenight, but not as dramatic as the vanilla effect. During bad weather, everything turns more towards grey. The green tint I consider special for a jungle setting. For Takistan I use more yellow, more powerful toning, and more so during nigh noon, so this green probably doesn't work too good there.

6) It's based on "let's try this simple maths and see how that works out" rather than complex realistic f-stop calculations.

I have no idea how well it works, under absolutely all conditions. Take a backup before tweaking the values, because you can tweak for a night and not get 100% there. The exposure system is turned off and returned to -1 if you actually use night vision goggles. Not tested with ACE and it's goggles, I suspect there could be issues.

For testing and tweaking, put this as init.sqf in a test mission and preview. Then move the functions to wherever you want them, and the loop to where the player is setup. The code:

X_fnc_Normalize = {
/*
	Author: CarlGustaffa

	Description:
	Normalize input based on numerical range, with option to clamp the result.

	Parameters:
	_this select 0: Number to normalize.
	_this select 1: Lower limit, number.
	_this select 2: Upper limit, number.
	_this select 3: Use clamping, bool. Optional, default true.

	Returns:
	Float. Normalized value. 0-1 with clamping on. Can exceed that range with clamping disabled.
*/
private ["_normalized","_min","_max","_failsafe","_clamp","_s"];
_normalized = _this select 0;
if (count _this < 3) exitWith {
	_s = format ["fn_normalize requires three parameters, only %1 given", count _this];
	if (bDebug) then {format ["fn_Normalize - %1", _s] call debugChat};
	_normalized
};
_min = _this select 1;
_max = _this select 2;
_clamp = if (count _this > 3) then {_this select 3} else {true};	//Optional parameter, default true. If false, answer may be outside 0-1 range.
_failsafe = if (_min == _max) then {0.0001} else {_min - _max};		//Avoids division by zero errors in the event of equal inputs.
_normalized= 1 - ((_normalized - _min) * (1 / _failsafe) +1);		//Scales the input parameter to 0-1.
if (_clamp) then {_normalized = _normalized max 0 min 1};			//And clamps outside values if not actively set to false.
_normalized
};
X_fnc_SunElev = {
/*
	Author: CarlGustaffa

	Description:
	Returns the suns altitude for current day and hour of the year on any island (whos latitude may differ).

	Parameters:
	None needed.

	Returns:
	Float. Suns altitude in degrees, positive values after sunrise, negative values before sunrise.
*/
private ["_lat", "_day", "_hour", "_angle", "_isday"];
_lat = -1 * getNumber(configFile >> "CfgWorlds" >> worldName >> "latitude");
_day = 360 * (dateToNumber date);
_hour = (daytime / 24) * 360;
_angle = ((12 * cos(_day) - 78) * cos(_lat) * cos(_hour)) - (24 * sin(_lat) * cos(_day));
_angle
};
X_fnc_SelectByLast = {
/*
	Author: CarlGustaffa

	Description:
	Basic a*(1-p) + b*p

	Parameters:
	_a, _b, and _p

	Returns:
	Float. Summed result of a and b, depending on p.
*/
private ["_min","_max","_sel","_ret"];
_a = _this select 0;
_b = _this select 1;
_p = _this select 2;
_ret = (1-_p)*_a + (_p*_b);
_ret
};
X_fnc_BlueNightYellowDay = {
/*
	Author: CarlGustaffa

	Description:
	Makes the night bluer and pale and day yellower and contrasty, depending on suns altitude (via call to X_fnc_SunElev).

	Parameters:
	None needed, you can control the sun angles via the two calls to X_fnc_Normalize.

	Returns:
	Array. Can be used with "colorcorrection" ppEffect system.
*/
private ["_ret","_amount","_bgtcontrast","_color","_bgt","_ctr","_a1","_r1","_g1","_b1","_r2","_g2","_b2","_sun"];
_amount = call X_fnc_SunElev;
if (_amount < 5) then {
	_amount = [_amount, -14, -1] call X_fnc_Normalize;
	_amount = _amount min 1;
	_amount = _amount max 0;
	_amount = 1 - _amount;
	_bgtcontrast = 1.0 - 0.32 * _amount;
	_color = -0.05 * _amount;
	_ret = [ _bgtcontrast, _bgtcontrast, 0, [0, 0, _color, _color],[0, 0, 0, 1],[0, 0, 0, 0]];
} else {
//These colors are tweaked a bit for jungle use. I use different, more yellowish tone during high day [30,52] for Takistan.
	_amount = [_amount, 5, 25] call X_fnc_Normalize;
	_amount = _amount min 1;
	_amount = _amount max 0;
	_val = (0.5*overcast*overcast) + (0.5*fog*fog);
	_bgt = [1.2,0.7,_val] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_ctr = [-0.015,0.015,_val] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_a1 = [0.85,1.3,_val] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_r1 = 1; _g1 = -1; _b1 = 1;
	_r2 = -0.0200, _g2 = -0.1587, _b2 = -0.0200;
	_bgt = [1.0,_bgt,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_ctr = [0.0,_ctr,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_r1 = [0.0,_r1,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_g1 = [0.0,_g1,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_b1 = [0.0,_b1,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_a1 = [1.0,_a1,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_r2 = [0.0,_r2,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_g2 = [0.0,_g2,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_b2 = [0.0,_b2,_amount] call X_fnc_SelectByLast;
	_ret = [1, _bgt, _ctr, [0,0,0,0], [_r1, _g1, _b1, _a1], [_r2, _g2, _b2, 0.0]];
};
_ret
};
//The following should be done in a player setup script, but this is good enough for SP testing.
[] spawn {
waitUntil {player == player};
_amount = call X_fnc_BlueNightYellowDay;
ppBlueNightYellowDay = ppEffectCreate ["colorCorrections", 2005];
ppBlueNightYellowDay ppEffectAdjust _amount;
ppBlueNightYellowDay ppEffectCommit 0.1;
ppBlueNightYellowDay ppEffectEnable true;
//Color
[] spawn {
	while{true} do {
		private "_amount";
		_amount = call X_fnc_BlueNightYellowDay;
		sleep 0.123;
		ppBlueNightYellowDay ppEffectAdjust _amount;
		ppBlueNightYellowDay ppEffectCommit 0;
		sleep 12.34;
	};
};
//Aperture
[] spawn {
	_apmin = 40;
	while{true} do {
		if(currentVisionMode player == 0) then {
			_val = (0.5*overcast*overcast) + (0.5*fog*fog);
			_angle = call X_fnc_SunElev;
			_angle = [_angle, -8,30] call X_fnc_Normalize;
			_amount = (1-_angle^1.75);
//				player globalChat format ["0-1: %1",_amount];
			_amount = 0.5 max _apmin - (_apmin * _amount);
			_amount = _amount * (1-0.05*(overcast max 0.2)) max 0.5;
//				player globalChat format ["ap: %1",_amount];
			setAperture _amount;
		} else {
			setAperture -1;
		};
		sleep 0.234;
	};
};
};

Edit: There is no adjustment time when switching from NVGs to normal vision, because we can't obtain the value the HDR system would have chosen. There is no getAperture or getTargetAperture commands.

[wipman 1]

Hi, i think that the terribly bad HDR can't be fixed without use something as the GDT HDR Mod, is as if the HDR were reversed (it make it dark where it should be clear and make it too clear [too much brightness] where and when it shouldn't) a good example of this can be noticed playing the Eagle Wing campaign (the best one imo) where when you're on the open field... your view becomes dark, entirely dark; is not that it increases the darkness on the casted shadows, that it does... it increases the darkness on the open field too.

Look at the BC2 HDR, you almost can't see a man inside a house if he's like 2m inside the house and outside there's the sun up in the sky; that's the good way, realistic, good and well done. As it should be. Here... the HDR acts over all the picture and don't distingish nothing, between the open field (where it should be clear) and under a casted shadow (where it should act and what should make darker, having little to no impact on the rest of the pic) maybe the HDR on the BC2 is the only good and realistic thing that it haves. Anyway... i don't think that the ArmA2 engine's HDR can work as the BC2 HDR; so the only thing that we have/can do is the GDT HDR Mod to deal with the biggest failure of the ArmA2, it's HDR. Let's C ya