• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

PBR Prep...

Mach3DS

Mach3DS

Charter Member
With the essential confirmation from fselite that PBR is going to be in v4.4, I think any devs that have WIP on up coming releases may want to consider how much time you have left prior to the v4.4 release if new product is nearing completion; and if it will be beneficial to convert it? Until we know for sure that v4.4 will retain backward compatibility with standard texturing methods it may behoove any of you devs to at least consider the transition implications prior to release. Also it will definitely behoove any of us considering that LM has made a massive hint that an all NEW gfx engine is coming in v5...
 
Last edited:
...At which point, when v5 and this new gfx debut, will usher in the truly modern version of FS. The implications are massive. Up to now, P3D has retained the vestiges of many FS versions going back to FS2002. But when the new gfx engine is debuted, it will likely sever that relationship with past simulators (at least in terms of getting port over content to work with minimal work). Nothing is for certain as we don't have any idea as of yet, but generally this is how these things work. I'm optimistic that LM will keep things at least backwards compatible from v4.3+ but who knows. They have said that backward compatibility is a major concern for them. Which is good. however, I don't think we can expect that all or even most things will work. Certainly cannot expect that lighting elements will work. My guess is that the Specular and Fresnel textures will be eliminated. With PBR, those textures are no longer needed. However, it is possible that the new GFX engine could read both sets? Using perhaps *.roughmet extension to apply PBR to a model or retain the old way? This is beyond my current paygrade....but not by much...I need a little more education in this area.
 
Scratch that, Rick, sorry..

In between Professional Bull Riders, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Petroleo Brasileiro Google found Physically Based Rendering so i'm reading up on that. Interesting! That will probabely do nicely for us flightsimmers although i'd certainly vote for v5 upgrades other than in the graphics department, like waaay better ATC and much more sophisticated weather.
 
PBR is not only a way of depicting textures and dynamic lightning. It is also a new way of a new process of designing 3d objects and texturing. Below are are few images of the AC seat of the ongoing C-7a Caribou project.

Cheers,
Mark

screen03.png


screen04.png
 
Javis said:
Scratch that, Rick, sorry..

In between Professional Bull Riders, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Petroleo Brasileiro Google found Physically Based Rendering so i'm reading up on that. Interesting! That will probabely do nicely for us flightsimmers although i'd certainly vote for v5 upgrades other than in the graphics department, like waaay better ATC and much more sophisticated weather.
Click to expand...

Well you're in luck....ATC frame is being laid out.... I've heard from an LM interview that they are going to introduce voice activated controls. Which would allow for direct radio comms with ATC.
 
This is my own opinion as a person. Please dont think the rest of the fellas from AH think this way but I think it's far too early to make predictions/requests for workflow modifications.

Reason 1.
Implementation of PBR. there are at present 2 well known implementations with UE4 and Unity. One uses the roughness/metalness workflow the other uses spec/gloss work flow. The 2 are similar but have some differences ( though there are some python scripts out there for quick conversions. ) Lets take X-planes implementation which is a hybrid PBR which works particularly well but is a different path to UE4/unity ( at least from my experience ). We dont know the format of the implementation in V4.4
Will there be SSAO?
Will there be packed RGB normal maps?

Reason 2.
Version 5. If there is a new GFX engine coming ( eg vulkan based ) then a lot of the work that a dev might do to get pbr working in V4.4 might go for nothing. Which is to say waste of time. Especially if V4.4 comes out but the rumour mill on V5 gets cranking the uptake of V4.4 might not be as spectacular as the uptake from V3.x to V4.x was. Why would anyone pay for V4.4 then find V5 is around the corner. A bit like having windows 98 then paying for Windows ME with Windows XP on the horizon. ( for you young'uns out there google windows me it was the vista of it's day ).

Reason 2.5.
Commercially wise market size might be a lot more smaller to require it. You talk backwards compatibility within p3d but commercially ask what a dev might need to do. Lets take a westland lysander for example. ( we always use the lysander as a hypothetical plane in AH ... not sure why :sentimental: ) a commercial dev - to be honest a freeware dev as well - would need to do the following.
- A source model for FSX
- A source model for P3d up to V4.3
- a source model for V4.4 if the changes required in materials is widely different -
- and eventually a source model for v5 if V5 gfx engine strays from V4.4 implementation.
Oh and the elephant in the room for commercial devs ? how much all of this backwards compatibility is going to cost in time and money and whether it should be passed onto the customer.

Sorry for the longish post but it is something I've been thinking about a lot.


TL;DR : too early to speculate when we dont know how LM is going to implement PBR.
 
Totally understand! My point is to say that it is coming and at least give it some thought rather than ignore. My humble guess, is that whatever experience is gained from v4.4 will likely be retained in v5. However the LM interview Adam did mention Vulkan. Which would be great!

V4.4 is free. Part of the v4 price. Unless you mean why would someone part for a v4.4 model? That is up to you guys as devs and how you charge. However that is one reason to think about release of product with this info available about the direction of P3D.... No right or wrong answer just an FYI moment.
 
000rick000 said:
Totally understand! My point is to say that it is coming and at least give it some thought rather than ignore. My humble guess, is that whatever experience is gained from v4.4 will likely be retained in v5. However the LM interview Adam did mention Vulkan. Which would be great!

V4.4 is free. Part of the v4 price. Unless you mean why would someone part for a v4.4 model? That is up to you guys as devs and how you charge. However that is one reason to think about release of product with this info available about the direction of P3D.... No right or wrong answer just an FYI moment.
Click to expand...


Oh I misunderstood. I thought V4.4 was a paid upgrade and not part of the v4 price. But I was wrong about that. It means that essentially there isnt a barrier to 4.4 uptake other than if your system cant take the extra overhead or you simply dont want to. Thanks for the heads up. I will be far more interested in the uptake of pbr and how important it is for the community to demand PBR techniques to be implemented by addon devs.

I also think all devs have already thought it through and have a roadmap in mind.

Thanks for the thought provoking post. It's great to get someone elses ideas.
 
Javis said:
Scratch that, Rick, sorry..

In between Professional Bull Riders, Pabst Blue Ribbon and Petroleo Brasileiro Google found Physically Based Rendering so i'm reading up on that. Interesting! That will probably do nicely for us flightsimmers although i'd certainly vote for v5 upgrades other than in the graphics department, like waaay better ATC and much more sophisticated weather.
Click to expand...
I have to agree Javis. . .PBR went right over my head (as do many things actually, lol) but I had no idea what that was about. Sounds mildly interesting, but like you, I would be more impressed with the two areas you touched on. Having said that however, I doubt that LM will address either one as they have never shown any interest (real interest that is) in tackling either of those concerns. I would have to say, that even for someone like me who consistently ignores ATC commands to "Go Around", the current ATC engine is prehistoric at best. I flew other simulators in the 90's that had far better ATC Control than this does.
 
000rick000 said:
Well you're in luck....ATC frame is being laid out.... I've heard from an LM interview that they are going to introduce voice activated controls. Which would allow for direct radio comms with ATC.
Click to expand...
. . .and that's fine if those voice activated commands don't simply elicit the same lame comments from ATC that are already part of the problem. Voice activated control means nothing if the base program isn't entirely revamped, ie: ATC actually monitoring the taxiways and runway you are assigned to. Currently you can taxi anywhere you want and take off from a completely different runway without getting a peep out of ATC. The entire ATC concept as it is right now is useless and would have to be completely stripped and rebuilt to be of any interest.
 
Last edited:
Being on topic again, PBR on the user's side is only a new way of depicting things. On the dev's side it is a totally new way of texturing 3d meshes. I really mean totally, because it involves new workflows and applications. If you're not into the latter you'll never know about it and just wonder why the textures look so real.

That's almost all about it, in my opinion.

Cheers,
Mark
 
roger-wilco-66 said:
PBR is not only a way of depicting textures and dynamic lightning. It is also a new way of a new process of designing 3d objects and texturing. Below are are few images of the AC seat of the ongoing C-7a Caribou project.

Cheers,
Mark

screen03.png
Click to expand...

Looks superb, Mark ! :encouragement:

I found the Tailored Radials facebook so i saw a LOT more where this came from. Awesome screenies, fantastic project !

Certainly know quite a bit more about PBR now. I'm taking the Christian Bradley course bit by bit. :cool:

So do i understand correctly that, as far as PBR is concerned, the Caribou project uses Substance Painter rather than Quixel ? ( i seem to get that impression from the screenies)

I have read Gordon's PBR post also. The renders of that gun are amazing !

Certainly am quite interested and exited about it now. Thanks !

Cheers,
Jan
 
Hi Jan,

thanks! I bought Quixel, and all the assets for the Caribou cockpit are textured with it. The screenshots are from the 3Do renderer.
Substance painter is also an interesting software, and does not need PS to run. But since I use PS anyway for other purposes, this is a no brainer for me.

I checked the Christian Bradley courses, not bad! Thanks for mentioning. But I have to disagree a bit with his statement "easy to learn" - it took me weeks to get into it, and months to learn tricks and different approaches. And the learning process is far from being over. But maybe that's just me :)

Cheers,
Mark
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top