[RELz] Realistic Lighting without Post-Processing

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 12:23 pm

I just wanna ask something...

In its essense, this mod is a weather mod right? You've changed the weather lighting settings for each specific weather, right?

Which brings up the next question, how did you change the interior lighting and the lighting of lights?
User avatar
Matt Bigelow
 
Posts: 3350
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 6:36 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 11:07 am

I can't do textures.. Sadly. :/

However.. just wait on the configuration. You'll like it. I can't just directly reduce the blinding effect, but I can open up customizing to everyone. :smile:
What settings would i need to configure in the mods ini file to make it have less of a glare?
User avatar
(G-yen)
 
Posts: 3385
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 11:10 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 3:40 am

I just wanna ask something...

In its essense, this mod is a weather mod right? You've changed the weather lighting settings for each specific weather, right?

Which brings up the next question, how did you change the interior lighting and the lighting of lights?

I've changed the weather lighting, the lighting templates, and the imagespaces. ;) Not just a weather mod.

What settings would i need to configure in the mods ini file to make it have less of a glare?

Probably sunlight scale. You'll have to try it and find out :)
User avatar
Crystal Clear
 
Posts: 3552
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2006 4:42 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 10:31 am

Probably sunlight scale. You'll have to try it and find out :smile:
Will mess with it. How stable is 1.7 so far? Have not seen much feedback on it.
User avatar
Kill Bill
 
Posts: 3355
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:22 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 4:07 am

I've changed the weather lighting, the lighting templates, and the imagespaces. :wink: Not just a weather mod.
Cool! But without sounding too dumb I hope, what is lighting templates and imagespaces? Where can you find it in SkyEdit (which I assume you used)?

I'm interesting in fiddling around with this when CK gets released so that's why I'm asking :P
User avatar
JAY
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2007 6:17 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 8:20 am

Cool! But without sounding too dumb I hope, what is lighting templates and imagespaces? Where can you find it in SkyEdit (which I assume you used)?

I'm interesting in fiddling around with this when CK gets released so that's why I'm asking :tongue:

Can't use SkyEdit. :tongue:

I hex edited everything :dry: I wrote the article on imagespaces, I could write the articles for the other two.. but I haven't gotten around to it. Dave's not added those in.

Imagespaces are basically the overlay parameters - where it overlays HDR, tinting, brightness and other details, inside the game. Lighting templates are the lighting data cells use to determine ambient lighting, directional lighting, fog values, and other details. Weather I also had to decipher the sections.

It took quite a while. :tongue:

Will mess with it. How stable is 1.7 so far? Have not seen much feedback on it.

Should be just fine. He just created an ENB shader for effects that mimic RL more so than the game's in-built renderer can do, while staying with the default scheme of RLWPP.
User avatar
Kortniie Dumont
 
Posts: 3428
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:50 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 5:17 am

Should be just fine. He just created an ENB shader for effects that mimic RL more so than the game's in-built renderer can do, while staying with the default scheme of RLWPP.
Alright thanks!
User avatar
Heather Stewart
 
Posts: 3525
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:04 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 1:42 pm

I like the sound of some of the changes that 1.7 makes, but I'm a bit pressed for performance so I've been avoiding anything other than the Antifreeze version of ENB (I have a decent graphics card, but I use 3D vision which pretty much doubles the load on your card.) I also like the sound of the changes you're planning to make. Will you be basing your future releases on 1.7 (which sounds like it won't look right unless you're using the custom shaders)? If so, is there a "light" version of ENB that would still work, or at least some recommended .ini settings for minimal performance impact?
User avatar
NeverStopThe
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:25 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 1:58 pm

I like the sound of some of the changes that 1.7 makes, but I'm a bit pressed for performance so I've been avoiding anything other than the Antifreeze version of ENB (I have a decent graphics card, but I use 3D vision which pretty much doubles the load on your card.) I also like the sound of the changes you're planning to make. Will you be basing your future releases on 1.7 (which sounds like it won't look right unless you're using the custom shaders)? If so, is there a "light" version of ENB that would still work, or at least some recommended .ini settings for minimal performance impact?

I'll be basing future releases on both. Tbh, there'll probably not be too many changes to the lighting scheme that's there - anything that goes further will be user customization, scripts around moon phases, and etc.

The ENB shader is pretty light, overall. Just some bloom based on brightness levels.

I'm finishing up the newest version.. which I hope people enjoy. It might wait to get released until tomorrow though.
User avatar
Charlotte Lloyd-Jones
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:53 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 8:11 am

hi great mod

am i correct that if i install the full.esp

i will have all the changes made in the optional files?

and the optional files are just the full version broken down into smaller esps?
User avatar
marina
 
Posts: 3401
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:02 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 5:47 am

I'll be basing future releases on both. Tbh, there'll probably not be too many changes to the lighting scheme that's there - anything that goes further will be user customization, scripts around moon phases, and etc.

The ENB shader is pretty light, overall. Just some bloom based on brightness levels.

I'm finishing up the newest version.. which I hope people enjoy. It might wait to get released until tomorrow though.

Sounds good. I just gave 1.7 a try, and things look great plus performance seems to have actually improved in some places (the .ini included with 1.7 has SSAO disabled, which I'm sure helps a lot.) One thing I've noticed though is that vampire night eye is causing the screen to go black in interior spaces (tested in Shroud Hearth Barrow.) It works fine outdoors though (Ivarstead.)
User avatar
Queen Bitch
 
Posts: 3312
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:43 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 3:38 am

hi great mod

am i correct that if i install the full.esp

i will have all the changes made in the optional files?

and the optional files are just the full version broken down into smaller esps?
For the most part it is true but there are a few other options that make light brighter and causes light spells to give off shadows that are not in the full.esp
User avatar
^_^
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 12:01 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 6:34 am

Honestly, IMO this looks unrealistic. You darken up the world and disregard light reflection.

Our moon is a huge rock in the sky, and yet has the ability to reflect enough sunlight to make lights unnecessary at night. So in that same sense, dungeons shouldn't be THAT dark. Though I do agree there are times when things are unnaturally bright, for the most part however, IMHO, it looks more realistic then most of this.

Just my opinion.
User avatar
Kyra
 
Posts: 3365
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 8:24 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 10:18 am

-snip-

And you are fully entitled to it. :) I'll hopefully have a customizable utility based off the default file, too, tomorrow - so you could make adjustments however you might want.
User avatar
josie treuberg
 
Posts: 3572
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 7:56 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 7:35 am

Looking forward to the new version. This is one of my top five 'must-have' mods :)
User avatar
kristy dunn
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:08 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 2:52 pm

Oh. Just did a search of the Nexus comments for this mod, looking for "night eye" and apparently the broken night eye is a known ENB bug. Someone warned 747823 about it, but he stuck with ENB for the injection because Enhanced Shaders has a bug related to UI and bloom. Guess we'll have to wait for Boris Vorontsov to fix this one?
User avatar
Sami Blackburn
 
Posts: 3306
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 7:56 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 5:53 pm

The main issue is that it's pretty unrealistic, imo, to have ambient lighting in a place with no lighting at all. :tongue: There's no way to express these without revamping the lighting, doing something like real lights for Skyrim, and to have a shader designed for it. Until we can do those, it's going to have some unrealistic tendencies either way.

Actually it is realistic to have some ambient lighting in a place with even a dim light source like a candle or a torch. What the game engine appears to do in the interiors is have a light source influence a distance away from itself and no more. In real life there is no abrupt cut off like this. The light works more on a curve by being brightest near itself, and then propagates out to a residual value of zero only at infinity. In a room, because of all the reflections, refraction, and scattering of photons, what you end up with is ambient light. The game engine does this by having bloom near the light, and ambient light everywhere else. Their idea of light propagation is actually closer to realistic with the three values (bloom, circle, ambient) than this mod (no bloom, circle, no ambient). What the vanilla lighting gets wrong is the intensity of the ambient lighting, and the absence of the circle of light for each location where there is a model of a light emitting object.
User avatar
Ian White
 
Posts: 3476
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:08 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 10:34 am

Actually it is realistic to have some ambient lighting in a place with even a dim light source like a candle or a torch. What the game engine appears to do in the interiors is have a light source influence a distance away from itself and no more. In real life there is no abrupt cut off like this. The light works more on a curve by being brightest near itself, and then propagates out to a residual value of zero only at infinity. In a room, because of all the reflections, refraction, and scattering of photons, what you end up with is ambient light. The game engine does this by having bloom near the light, and ambient light everywhere else. Their idea of light propagation is actually closer to realistic with the three values (bloom, circle, ambient) than this mod (no bloom, circle, no ambient). What the vanilla lighting gets wrong is the intensity of the ambient lighting, and the absence of the circle of light for each location where there is a model of a light emitting object.

What it really needs is a revamp of the vanilla lighting system. The graphics capabilities are barely improved from oblivion.

Here's a quote from 747823 regarding graphics in the game;

Spoiler

1. Graphics

Is there anything good to say about the graphics? I guess some of the interiors look nice, such as Dragonsreach. Overall, it looks like a game from 2006-2007, though. And I don't think "consoles" is a good reason to accept that. They could easily add variables to enable/disable specific shaders, and package the console versions with lower resolution textures and reduce the 3D model LOD level by 1 or 2 (If they even had an proper LOD system... will comment on that later).

> Shadow mapping is implemented terribly. The shadows are blocky as we all know, and there aren't enough slices, so distant objects either don't cast shadows, or the blockiness becomes insane. Terrain also doesn't cast shadows. Why not? It looks terrible to be standing behind a huge mountain at sunset and see yourself and trees around you fully lit, even though you should be in the shadow of the mountain.

> No implementation of modern graphics techniques. This is obvious, and there are some remedies for it, but nothing completely effective. For example, the particle and light systems look almost exactly like Oblivion. The falloff on light sources is incredibly unrealistic. Particles aren't affected by ambient light or light sources. Fog isn't affected by light sources. Grass isn't affected by ambient light or light sources. Most light sources don't cast shadows. There's no SSAO, HBAO, light propagation/reflected light, or any kind of global illumination attempt. There is no displacement for water, "foamy edges" for water, caustic seafloor textures, or nice underwater fog. Underwater looks almost the same as it did in Morrowind. And what's with the distant water? It's always a solid color, and you can often see the edge of the model, instead of it going all the way to the horizon. The subsurface scattering is a joke and looks terribly fake, Crysis 1 from 2007 had better SSS, as well as a lot of the other features I covered. I'm not forgetting FXAA, but that's hardly an improvement. MSAA looks better anyway. There are rarely "decal" objects to add unique texture detail. It would be easy to add a lot more single-polygon objects with alpha channels and a shader that projects their texture onto close objects in the direction of their normals. Then you could have some unique dirt texture decals in various places and not need to store every detail in the main texture.

> The textures and models are horrible. This is obvious as well, as there are tons of texture mods already. All of the rocks and cliffs in the game use literally two textures. Their UV maps are terrible and their detail level ranges from incredibly detailed (and thus too noisy), to so low that they look like textures from Doom. The equipment textures are equally bad - look at the orcish armor for example. There are no advanced shaders to add texture detail either. They could have had a "detail texture" which would have a much higher tiling size and would become visible while getting close to a model. They could have also added DX10 tesselation displacement for the PC version. The models are obviously low-poly, and I don't think there's a proper LOD system. Models for weapons and armor, for example, only have a first and third person model. They're both at full detail until they fade out of the scene completely. To improve visuals, there could have been 3+ LOD levels, with the nearest ones being higher quality than the models currently in the game. If done correctly, this could even improve performance.

> Covering up the lack of modern graphics techniques and lack of proper lighting model with screen shaders. This isn't as obvious, and I've mostly "fixed" it with one of my mods. There's bloom everywhere, and it's basically the same bloom from Oblivion. The eye adaptation is fake, and doesn't actually adjust the "exposure", it just makes the screen dark or light for a second if you look somewhere that's a lot darker. You can compare by using my new version of Realistic Lighting with the custom shader in ENB. It has real adaptation. There's a forced contrast increase in the game. This causes a "black crush" thing in dark textures, where detail is lost. I think the objective of this was to make the shadows look darker, but a better way to go about that is to actually lower the ambient color and increase the light brightness. There's also the unnatural "tint" over everything on exteriors that looks like a yellow photo filter, and saturation is very inconsistent. There's no shader for making lit areas be more saturated than dark areas (as it would be in reality). Nights and dungeons are way too bright, but this is more of a design decision, so I'll cover it in the art section.

It's a little over the top, but it's pretty accurate in a lot of cases.

Imo? It's a sign that Zenimax rushed Bethesda's dev team. Don't forget that when modders revamp the game, we number in thousands, versus developers who are under a hundred, and much less that deal with these issues. It's a criticism of the game, though, and it's a fair one. I just don't believe the finger should be pointed towards the devs. The devs follow what marketing wants - otherwise they don't get their paychecks. And marketing wants a fast, big release for maximum profit with minimal effort. <_<

All the code is done, I just can't get it to recognize my ini file o.o Not sure why.
User avatar
Marie Maillos
 
Posts: 3403
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 4:39 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 12:02 pm

You know, perhaps I should be ashamed to say this because I have a degree in designing for digital media, and even got a very high mark on parts of the course focusing on 3d design, but whenever I see someone ranting on how Skyrim looks I'm struck with either total apathy or dumbfoundedness which amounts to me just thinking; "I dun know, it all looks fine to me."

It really feels like one of the many things I should give a damn but I just can't.
User avatar
Carlitos Avila
 
Posts: 3438
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:05 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 4:19 am

You know, perhaps I should be ashamed to say this because I have a degree in designing for digital media, and even got a very high mark on parts of the course focusing on 3d design, but whenever I see someone ranting on how Skyrim looks I'm struck with either total apathy or dumbfoundedness which amounts to me just thinking; "I dun know, it all looks fine to me."

It really feels like one of the many things I should give a damn but I just can't.

I'll agree with you tbh. :) I'm not going to debate how it looks - the facts are that it could include more advanced shaders, better fallouts on lighting, etc etc, but in the end it doesn't bother me. The lighting palettes bug me, which is why this was a project. I'd also like actual light sources for those who don't have them. But otherwise, that's enough for me.
User avatar
Ownie Zuliana
 
Posts: 3375
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2006 4:31 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 10:59 am

Well, just to make a comment that's more relevant, I have had a little go with this mod and overall I like it. I'm a tiny bit conflicted on how well this works alongside the iccc fxaa settings I'm using, but the injector settings are subtle enough to work alongside this mod. However, I have to mirror a sentiment already expressed in this thread that an optional "slightly brighter interiors" might be a good idea.
User avatar
TOYA toys
 
Posts: 3455
Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:22 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 5:19 am

Oh. Just did a search of the Nexus comments for this mod, looking for "night eye" and apparently the broken night eye is a known ENB bug. Someone warned 747823 about it, but he stuck with ENB for the injection because Enhanced Shaders has a bug related to UI and bloom. Guess we'll have to wait for Boris Vorontsov to fix this one?

After the 1.4 update I was seeing a lot of CTDs, so I started disabling mods to see if one of them might be the culprit. I reverted to the Antifreeze version of ENB from the ENB version included in 1.7, but left in 1.7's version of Realistic Lighting - Full.esp. The vampire night eye bug still happened. I then switched to the 1.6b version of Realistic Lighting - Full.esp, and 1.7's version of ENB, and vampire night vision was fine. So something in the 1.7 .esp is messing up night eye, not ENB.

The bug makes the screen go entirely white when night eye is activated, then completely dark when it is deactivated. It only happens indoors, outdoors everything seems fine.
User avatar
Ella Loapaga
 
Posts: 3376
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:45 pm

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 1:11 pm

After the 1.4 update I was seeing a lot of CTDs, so I started disabling mods to see if one of them might be the culprit. I reverted to the Antifreeze version of ENB from the ENB version included in 1.7, but left in 1.7's version of Realistic Lighting - Full.esp. The vampire night eye bug still happened. I then switched to the 1.6b version of Realistic Lighting - Full.esp, and 1.7's version of ENB, and vampire night vision was fine. So something in the 1.7 .esp is messing up night eye, not ENB.

The bug makes the screen go entirely white when night eye is activated, then completely dark when it is deactivated. It only happens indoors, outdoors everything seems fine.

I'll take a look at it. :)
User avatar
stacy hamilton
 
Posts: 3354
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:03 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 4:34 am

Who wants to test? :biggrin:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/56852942/Realistic%20Lighting%20Test.zip

Have at it. Report any bugs. If you can check out the plugin itself, feel free.

There's not much information in the ini as to what the variables do and what the defaults are, I'll add that tomorrow.

Edit: No error-checking, though. Keep values reasonable. :P It doesn't complain if you set the alpha in tinting to 300, when it's supposed to go from 0 to 1. I'll have more information later.
User avatar
Sarah Knight
 
Posts: 3416
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:02 am

Post » Mon May 21, 2012 1:11 pm

Okay, I'm currently using version 1.7, and was basically blinded by my whole screen going white when I used Night Eye. Deactivating it made the screen way too dark to see and I had to reload my game for things to return to normal.
User avatar
Amanda Leis
 
Posts: 3518
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 1:57 am

PreviousNext

Return to V - Skyrim