Human eyes are lenses too. Just look directly at a light bulb and notice how it's all blurry around the edges even when you're looking at it from the lit up room.
[Graphics] Could someone please explain Bloom to me?
- Thread starter Adelheid
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Human eyes are lenses too. Just look directly at a light bulb and notice how it's all blurry around the edges even when you're looking at it from the lit up room.
Human eyes are lenses too. Just look directly at a light bulb and notice how it's all blurry around the edges even when you're looking at it from the lit up room.
Yeah but the human eye is a fair bit different to a camera lens for eg. Infact if I look at a globe the little dot gets stuck in my vision afterwards because of the way our eyes adjust to light variations. It certainly does get blurry around the edge of a light source, which is where bloom does work but Ive been outside in very hot sun living in the desert and not very many surfaces at all completely white out under intense sunlight.
See the lightsource bit is kewl its what it does to the rest of the screen at the same time, they do it alot in soapies like days of our lives or somethin where everything emits a halo effect for drama. Not only that but they do high contrast in that one, I think twin peaks did it as well without the contrast.
Things Im talking about is like lens flares, corona's do happen under the right atmospheric conditions. I think thats something they should take into account more, volumetric lights can be blurry but they can add to the atmosphere when used correctly.
Well unlike you I have actually contributed towards the actual subject of the thread. Perhaps you'd like to keep your sarcasm to yourself?I sure didn't see that VG cats comic coming
Yeah, that was great. Using it like that is pretty awesome
But there is really no point in just blooming up every static surface for no reason at all. Or UT3 has pretty much uniformly white glowing skies, no matter where the sun is. Sometimes it seems that Unreal had better skyboxes than that.
Last edited:
Someone said a good example of HDR and post-process bloom was HL2:Ep2 and were unsure about Crysis.
Well, here's some of that.
bright, low sun hitting the hut and objects out front, brightening tree tops
[screenshot]http://www.incrysis.com/wiki/images/6/6e/HDR_bloom.jpg[/screenshot]
light glow behind the green leaves and shadows coming through
[screenshot]http://www.incrysis.com/wiki/images/5/56/Subsurfacescattering.jpg[/screenshot]
explosion against a bright, midday sky
Well, here's some of that.
bright, low sun hitting the hut and objects out front, brightening tree tops
[screenshot]http://www.incrysis.com/wiki/images/6/6e/HDR_bloom.jpg[/screenshot]
light glow behind the green leaves and shadows coming through
[screenshot]http://www.incrysis.com/wiki/images/5/56/Subsurfacescattering.jpg[/screenshot]
explosion against a bright, midday sky
Last edited:
Prime eg there of that whiteout I was talking about, it seems the light drains every last detail from the surface and leaves almost just a plain white patch. Even if the surface has details in it which would be like a shadow, ofcoarse white materials emit some light which will bounce off other nearby surfaces but this gives the impression its glowing which a matte material wouldnt do. With the amount of sunlight an bloom in that scene you would expect more volumetrics from stuff in the air for the light to bounce off.
Yeah that shotgun looks untextured from here as well
This shot looks much better I rekon! You can see the distance being fogged out alittle and the other volumetrics coming in across ways from the top of the mountains the leaves are getting alittle whiteout but alot more consistant with the overall scene. For leaves you would expect more white out than a matte material because of the layer of liquid inside the leaves and the glossy green exterior
Cant you change the post processing settings? There are things like 'Muted' and 'Vivid' in the options screen.
The main post process settings are controlled in the map itself, so the mapper has to go and set that up per map. The distance at which DOF starts, how much it blurs, Colour Levels, Bloom Intensity, etc cannot be changed any other way (afaik).
shadow_dragon
is ironing his panties!
You should consider that your, kinda of not really looking at the action in an FPS through your eyes but more through a monitor via your eyes. Essentially rendering everything 2D.
I believe many game designers lean away from trying to reporduce a natural eye type perspective of FPS games these days, hence why it's only the bare minimum these days that you can see your feet/cleavage* when you look down.
For a while now game designers have reproduced camera lens style effects to render more realism to FPS games, with things like lens flare and such. I think bloom is a genuinely good tool for games it's just poorly used in some cases... though i make exceptions to when the unrealistic-use actual improves the visual aesthetics.
I think in the future when designers have gotten the swing of it and it's been coupled with eevn more advanced tech it'll prove to be a useful enough tool.
* I recall some game from a decade or so back with dinosaurs on some tropical island and to check your health you had to look at a tattoo of a heart on the top of the female character's.... chest, that you had to play as. I recall you could shoot yourself in tthe foot, but not the boob thankfully... they really would've gotten in the way I fear.
Last edited:
It seems like almost every new visual gimmick in games are used by developers like a kid discovering the lens flare for the first time in Photoshop. Looks like we are at least finally distancing ourselves from having everything look like it was covered in buckets of grease using normal-mapping.
Even if the surface has details in it which would be like a shadow, ofcoarse white materials emit some light which will bounce off other nearby surfaces but this gives the impression its glowing which a matte material wouldnt do.
Yeah that shotgun looks untextured from here as well
Keep in mind in that shot it's a low sun coming in hard from the left. Maybe your display is bright? It isn't really killing any of the details or the surface texture. You can still see little rocks on the ground and the stretch of wearing material continuing down the wall on the right.
Oh, and smooth stainless steel shotguns tend to not have much texture
What did you expect it to be brown and black and shiny and brand new?
It looks matte grey from the shot, maybe it is just black in direct sunlight. I mean the shot itself doesnt look bad but I do feel alittle detail is lost in the whiteout, you can certainly see alittle bit of rocks but not much. I mean it just looks wierd to have shadows there at all with all that white on the ground and in the shadows you can see the amount of detail that is being lost from bloom. You would certainly expect some highlights on the top of the rocks but since its just a texture it all comes out flat.
I guess its just a style they went for but I wouldnt call it 'realistic' TM
I dont think my display is bright, even if it wasnt Id just end up with flat grey spots instead of flat white spots theres an obvious lack of details in the fully lit areas. Specular highlights and bounced lighting is one thing, this bloom is something else entirely
I guess its just a style they went for but I wouldnt call it 'realistic' TM
I dont think my display is bright, even if it wasnt Id just end up with flat grey spots instead of flat white spots theres an obvious lack of details in the fully lit areas. Specular highlights and bounced lighting is one thing, this bloom is something else entirely
The way I understand it, bloom is used because of the limited brightness of computer monitors.
The problem is that monitors only have 255^3 colors, which means 255 brightness levels. The actual brightness depends on the brightness level of the particular monitor, but in short this means that there are only 255 steps between pure black and pure white.
In real life, there are WAY more steps, probably infinite. However, until someone develops a monitor that can match the light intensity of say, the sun or a magnesium flame (both pretty bright), accurate light reproduction is impossible.
What bloom does is compensate for brightness levels that are outside the monitor's range by simulating what your eye would see if the monitor actually could make bright enough images, and somehow adding that to the normal image (in 255^3 colors of course).
HDR is more or less the same principle. It processes the lighting in a much wider range than the monitor is capable of displaying or the eye is capable of seeing at the same time, and then uses that data as well as the average image brightness to compress that data into an image that monitors can display.
This has little to do with camera lens effects. More with the sensors. When we're talking about lens flares, yes those are lens effects.
The problem is that monitors only have 255^3 colors, which means 255 brightness levels. The actual brightness depends on the brightness level of the particular monitor, but in short this means that there are only 255 steps between pure black and pure white.
In real life, there are WAY more steps, probably infinite. However, until someone develops a monitor that can match the light intensity of say, the sun or a magnesium flame (both pretty bright), accurate light reproduction is impossible.
What bloom does is compensate for brightness levels that are outside the monitor's range by simulating what your eye would see if the monitor actually could make bright enough images, and somehow adding that to the normal image (in 255^3 colors of course).
HDR is more or less the same principle. It processes the lighting in a much wider range than the monitor is capable of displaying or the eye is capable of seeing at the same time, and then uses that data as well as the average image brightness to compress that data into an image that monitors can display.
This has little to do with camera lens effects. More with the sensors. When we're talking about lens flares, yes those are lens effects.
haha! I found that pretty funny.
You can see instances of bloom on any clear sunny day.
It doesn't require a camera lens or some stuff.
________
Nexium pregnancy
Last edited: