Author Topic: IL2/FB Muzzle explosions (Read 444 times)

Wotan · « **on:** July 28, 2004, 08:33:31 AM »

Maybe coming to end...

Quote

I don't think so, that it is very good logic.

Lets point several things.

1. Modern powder isn't the same as it was in WWII time. And modern cartriges even of WWII type loaded with modern powder.
2. Matrix of digital camera working _without_ mechanical shutter and with the good day light non professional camera's matrix don't register the very short time of light (due to limit of matrix interrogation (electronics limit)
3. There are many other films that show other picture. Also for the present there Parabellum and MP44. For the last one the mazzle flash registered on a WWII time film is about 1.5 m.
Also there is films for MG/FF and others that show in flight the muzzle flash more than 2 m.

I will not discuss it anymore. All things are very relative if know/evaluate more than you only may see without complete evaluation.

We plan to make different transparency of muzzle flash for day light and night. But I'm not sure that we will be able to make it till release of PF. That all I can say currently.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/6/ubb.x?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=63110913&m=776105075&p=2

Wotan · « **Reply #1 on:** July 28, 2004, 08:35:30 AM »

Quote

I should agree with you in part and disagree in other.

I'm also photgrapher with the too more tha 30 years experinece in BW and color films (last two years I begun to use only digital cameras and as engineer I learn also as well the problems of sencitive matrix of these cameras). I know how works BW films and which type of 18-35mm camera films of WWII time more sencitive to one or other color of day light (I have even books for photographers for WWII times and refence books for photgraphics materials of that time, as well as samples of the films even non-exposured Smile). Say many of Agfa BW films were more sencitive to red part of light than green or blue and at night with the muzzle flash really could be big overexposure on a very slow shutter speed, as well as the lenses had much greater distortions and dispersion/refraction of light that call also aureoles on both lenses and exposured films, if not count also aureole of sigle point of light that also presnt on the exposured due to some physical problems of the film structure(in my collection is about 100 cameras and half of them are produced in in 1930th-1940th, including Leika, Kodak, Rollei, Agfa, Balda (Italian), etc. As well as I have several lenses that was developed especially for me by my personal order and my drawings on the main russian lenses manufacture)

So, without details of my experience in that area, I would say that I evaluated a lot of WWII time BW and color films where were registered the MF and evaluated the speed of shutter of the cameras (cinema), sencitivity of the films to spectrum, etc...
So if you know for example the famous IL-2 film that show shooting 23 mm cannons in attack, the registered there MF on TASMA film with the sencetivity more to green-blue light, common sencitivity 32 ASA, sutter speed was 18-20 FPS is about 3 m leight in a flight.
Analizig that input data and when you know how is registered the flame (with such conditions it isn't the same as sun for example that will overexposure really...Not the same case!) and smoke on that film I found that the leight of only flame there is more than 1,5 m on a speed 350-400 km/h.

Then I checked that thing with many other films, got result and then we put special formulas that to determine such things for all weapons with equal input conditions (Ideally should be different)

Now personal answer why "ignore".

We don't ignore and many times answered. Sorry if you personally didn't read it.

Will answer again.
We plan to change it with differences for daylight and night time with the approximated formula that will "evaluate" the human eye sencitivity and "adjustment" of the human eye "lense" that will also take in account the dynamic range of light that could be simulated on a modern monitor (that is just 1.6-1.8D that we can use, if you only know what this digit means in photography).
But for this we need a time. And we have currently much more important things to do.
Anyway if we will make it I'm sure that you will be not satisfied. Because I think with all your experience you probably can't know other things, that were evaluated really in our team...

However I promise you that in our next sim after the PF you will be able to read all digits on indicators that are neccessary to read (if you cant currently, I'm sorry Smile, but that is limit with the compromise of you RAM and speed of PC. We was able to make greater resolution of texture, but you will loose the dynamic FPS beeing in a cockpit. That is a limit and rule that we need to use. Its a dogfight of compromises).

slimm50 · « **Reply #2 on:** July 28, 2004, 08:55:17 AM »

Is it just me, or did anyone else have difficulty following his broken english-style writing? But I think I get the gist of what he intended: that is, the "team" is working diligently to preserve the integrity/ realism of the muzzle flashes. That same dedication, I would presume, can be extrapolated to other facets of IL2 program. Sounds promising to me.

I've simply got to make room in my budget to upgrade my computer. I see only wonderful things on the horizon for the flight sim community.

Pongo · « **Reply #3 on:** July 28, 2004, 10:41:50 AM »

No one can do whiny and condesending at the same time like Oleg can.
I could give a rats bellybutton what stupid long drawn out method he used to come up whith the muzzle flashes in that game. They are wrong. Anyone that has ever shot a heavy or medium machine gun knows they are wrong. What a sniveler.

Fishu · « **Reply #4 on:** July 29, 2004, 01:24:46 AM »

What kind of black powder did they use in WWII?
Even a musket didn't act like a flamethrower and those we're rather smoky

IIRC in the movies they used to use gasoline for the flame effects of explosions, since with just the explosives it didn't come out as a fireballs they wanted.
Like we all know, in the past the explosions were little over made in the movies.
Everything was able to explode in a bright flameball.

Pei · « **Reply #5 on:** July 29, 2004, 06:31:14 AM »

This good news: the muzzle flashes are a bit OTT.

leitwolf · « **Reply #6 on:** July 29, 2004, 06:29:29 PM »

yeah, they should dump the flashes from the cockpit. Leave them for mass-compatibility (eye candy factor) from the outside of the plane.. there are already two kinds of sun/lens flare effects.
The way the nose MG blocks the view in the 190 is plain wrong.

Staga · « **Reply #7 on:** July 29, 2004, 07:28:46 PM »

Heh I did just remember that both Bf109 and Fw190 were also used as a night fighters... I wonder if they left all nose-guns unloaded in 109s and used just gondolas...yep, that's the ticket.