1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer 1C: Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-29-2011, 11:27 PM
JG52Krupi's Avatar
JG52Krupi JG52Krupi is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,124
Default

Okay here to reiterate what the others have stated regarding the "Camera" side.

Take this video, it shows extreme cases of a camera modifying what we would see in real time.



The camera shutter speed is approximately in sync with the revolution of the prop, therefore the blades appear to stay stationary in the video. The same can be applied to the video you posted, its a trick of the camera that has you fooled.
__________________


Quote:
Originally Posted by SiThSpAwN View Post
Its a glass half full/half empty scenario, we all know the problems, we all know what needs to be fixed it just some people focus on the water they have and some focus on the water that isnt there....
Gigabyte X58A-UD5 | Intel i7 930 | Corsair H70 | ATI 5970 | 6GB Kingston DDR3 | Intel 160GB G2 | Win 7 Ultimate 64 Bit |
MONITOR: Acer S243HL.
CASE: Thermaltake LEVEL 10.
INPUTS: KG13 Warthog, Saitek Pedals, Track IR 4.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-30-2011, 06:47 AM
norulz norulz is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 75
Default

Adonys, you are wrong here. as simple as that.

We should take you one day to the airfield and put you to watch the 2 bladed motodelta for an hour while you play with the throtle till you get convinced. Ofcourse you pay the gas used .

BTW... being wrong is not a pleasure thing for morale but standing corrected is.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-30-2011, 07:03 AM
Vevster Vevster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kalimba View Post
Ok...Sorry if I said angry...Intense would be more accurate...

But there you go..2 pilots...Same conclusions...

Salute !
Dense would be more more appropriate.

The "example by camera" is so laughable that it becomes pathetic. Especially since adonys repeated it several times already.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-30-2011, 09:16 AM
adonys adonys is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 850
Default

Vevster and the others alike, people not knowing to have a civilized contradictory discussion, you're out of the lines with your comments. If there's anything laughable around here, are the comments made by people like you, and those people themselves.

Stating things you just "know" as facts without really trying to look into them, and understand them, it is a sign of sheer stupidity.

HERE. have a look. It is the section called "Wagon-wheel effect under continuous illumination". And you can have another one here, here and here. Wikipedia is not the mother of all knowledge, and not even everything presented on it is it as it is presented in there, but it is a good place from which to start your looking into gaining new knowledge.

Human eye and vision mechanisms are not a thing we understand completely yet. Even more, people have different sensitivities when it comes to what they see (I'm sure all of you know instances when some people were saying they see a flicker, while some don't related with 60 Hz CRT monitors).

The effect we've discussed in here is not only seen on camera images.

Are you trying to tell me that none of you actually saw this effect in real life, with their own eyes, while looking at the turning wheel cover's of the thousands of cars around you?!! If you haven't, try to pay a little attention next time, specially to the ones not firmly fixed (as in allowed of an independent rotation move) to the wheels.

Instead trying to check first, and try to learn new things and enlarge your knowledge, you jump directly at barking and biting, which is a stupid behavior.

Even more, you've turned this thread into something which it actually ain't: this thread it is NOT about the propeller arc effect, be it missing/crippled or not (and btw, why were you not jumping at MG's throat for actually adding an effect like that into the game, if it is not what your eyes are seeing?). it is about ALL the effects removed/modified forever from the game before adding the anti-epilepsy filter.

Stop being stupid, and attack in wolfpacks without really knowing why you're aggressive in the first place.

Last edited by adonys; 03-30-2011 at 09:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-30-2011, 09:32 AM
Vevster Vevster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adonys View Post
Stating things you just "know" as facts without really trying to look into them, and understand them, it is a sign of sheer stupidity.
At last you are able, to see yourself in the mirror....

You've been telling us on several threads that the effects are wrong, that is not what is seen by the eyes of a pilot etc... and as a proof, you bring us camera footage when people tell you a amera doesn't necessarily work as the human eye. Depends on shutter speed.

I've flown in planes with propellers, a T-26, a Steaman PT-17 and some modern planes like cessnas, what you see in front of you is not what you describe.

A turning wheel on a car is quite different than a propeller. Please look at these two different objects when they are not in motion, just to be sure....
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-30-2011, 09:43 AM
adonys adonys is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 850
Default

You must be really mental challenged to not understand what I've said at the beginning of that thread.

Here, a full quote just for you:

Quote:
This is for all of us to understand better what's this about, and what's the current situations of it. I gave up having to explain it in countless threads across multiple forums.


Guys, you need the facts, first before anything, and the facts at this moment are the following:

- MG (Maddox Games) started to address epilepsy issues in IL2 at UBI's request
- they've put out of the game (previously announced as for good, as in forever) some of them (there's no list of this, just Luthier's statement, but it included the cockpit view propeller's arc) - in both IL2 CoD and BoB
- at the point MG understood there's no time to address them all before release, they've stopped addressing the effects individually and started to put up the full screen filter - in both IL2 CoD and BoB

- after we've found out, and due to rampage on the forums, Luthier said 1C version BoB will accept an optional filter (or even removing it for good) and stop individually addressing effects to meet epilepsy requirements, but the UBI version CoD will have the filter permanent (or at least until all effects will be addressed individually, making the filter obsolete)
- Luthier also said that it might re-add/un-cripple the list of individual effects already modified to meet the epilepsy requirement in the 1C's BoB version before turning to the filter solution (yet, it might not equals for sure)
- after more ranting UBI sais it will make the filter optional

BUT

- making the filter optional doesn't mean they won't further continue to address (read cripple) effects individually in order to meet epilepsy requirements
- and even if they stop further individually addressing the effects, it also doesn't mean they will re-add/un-cripple the already modified effects crippled to meet the epilepsy requirements


We need an official clarification of these two problems from UBI/Luthier in order to consider the CoD at par with BoB

Of course, all of the above assuming UBI is not just lying to us in order to not drop the launch sales. We can only have faith in their word, and check it in time, by comparing the visuals from the two different editions (Cod vs BoB)..
I was not telling that the effects are wrong, I was just telling that LUTHIER SAID that they had to modify some effects (ie change them from how they initially implemented them in the way they thought they should really be) in order to meet UBI's anti-epilepsy requirements. And I was telling that UBI saying they'll remove the anti-epilepsy filter IT IS NOT THE SAME as also putting back those effects the way they initially were.

It's really funny to see how people are wrongly understanding something and distorting your words, and then accuse you of something you have nothing to do with.

Really funny..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-30-2011, 09:53 AM
Vevster Vevster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by adonys View Post
It's really funny to see how people are wrongly understanding something and distorting your words, and then accuse you of something you have nothing to do with.

Really funny..
Yup, funny:

Quote:
Originally Posted by adonys View Post
really? there you go, have a look. at some point, the camera is looking from inside the cockpit exactly how a pilot would look

"Camera shots
Really funny indeed

You already forgot what you wrote?

Quote:
Originally Posted by adonys View Post
it is not just a camera optical illusion, it appears the same to the eye too, and indeed the way it appears depends on the rpm. I haven't seen them on real airplanes,yet I have seen them on plenty of real helicopters. the same effect actually can be seen on any rotating blades (propellers, car wheels protection plastics, old trains spiked wheels, etc).

where are real pilots flying single engine aircrafts (and not flying them just once), to answer this?

You haven't seen it yourself, many here told you what they saw when flying, but you keep on bringing camera footage and car wheels....

Last edited by Vevster; 03-30-2011 at 09:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-30-2011, 10:12 AM
adonys adonys is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 850
Default

You are not right, I've asked at some point where are the real pilots to say from their own experience about this, and after some posted, I don't remember me continuing to insist on that matter.

And even so, they might be wrong. They might have been accustomed with it, and not really seeing it anymore. There were also other pilots saying that it can be observed in certain conditions.

I'm sure it's a much more complex problem to only be answered with a simple yes/no.

And why would not the wheel covers effect be the same? when on wiki is clearly put in the same category named "wagon wheel effect", together with the propellers and some other examples?

Thing is, some people might be more sensitive to it than others.

And more, I am saying that I saw the effect with my own eyes on car wheel covers and helicopter propellers. Have you not seen this effect with your own eyes while paying attention to it while in a plane cockpit, or looking at an aircraft/helicopter propeller? And if not, why are you here to argue about this?

PS: it quite funny to see your "A turning wheel on a car is quite different than a propeller. Please look at these two different objects when they are not in motion, just to be sure...." statement. And I'm pretty sure you're not so stupid as, while they are not the same objects indeed (and no one claimed they were), in to not see the similarity of those same named objects..

And this stops here, I do not wish to continue a stupid argument with some who it's obviously too thick to have a decent argument. Have a nice day, mr. Vevster and adieu and welcome to my ignore list. Feel free to do the same with me.

Last edited by adonys; 03-30-2011 at 10:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-30-2011, 11:09 AM
Azimech's Avatar
Azimech Azimech is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Leerdam, The Netherlands
Posts: 428
Default

I have an old 1950's electric fan, three narrow blades, white plastic. I've switched it on and off a couple of times, not once did I see the effect of 3 three distinct blades rotating in the haze. You see the haze, or you see the blades when spinning down.

Then I did it again looking through my digital camera. Yes, now I did see the effect, on the screen.

Conclusion: No prop visible in real life. Anyone with a fan and a cam can do this experiment.
__________________
Insuber said: 1% of facts, 35% of passion, 19% of testosterone, 50% of intellectual speculation = Il2 fan cocktail is served, better with a drop of Tobasco ...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-30-2011, 11:25 AM
robtek's Avatar
robtek robtek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,816
Default

Some people are so limited that they dont allow reality to influence their point of view!

There is a saying related to einstein about the only two things that are limitless in this universe, but he was not shure in one instance.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:50 PM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.