Originally posted by Quizzical
Originally posted by Doogiehowser
Originally posted by Quizzical
I assume SweetFX is the second picture from each pair? I say that because it looks like it would be easy to generate the second picture from the first and impossible to go the other way around. Look at the washed-out colors in the second picture of each pair, where you lose a lot of detail because broad areas get clamped to solid white.
If you want to make everything brighter, then HDR as a post-processing effect is entirely the wrong way to do it, precisely because you'll lose so much detail. If you want to grab an external program to make your game look worse, that's your choice. But I don't really see the point of it.
Also, getting a 10 frames per second increase by using SweetFX as opposed to the same in-game settings without SweetFX should be impossible. Adding additional post processing effects means more work for the GPU, and that should bring your frame rates down. If you turned down some in-game settings in addition to using SweetFX, then that would explain it.
You can go the other way around too because that is how much you can control how your games look like. When i use in game HQ AA my fps goes down to 35 from 40+. With Sweet FX AA 0 FPS loss and it actually looks better than in game AA.
Same with Bloom and HDR. Since Sweetfx mimics the HDR it is also less taxing on your system. I like colors which pop out more and since AOC devs went for realistic graphic look, the vibrant settings fit right in with the game.
The before screenshot look washed out where as in second one colors look richer and lighting looks more realistic.
Anyways, this was something i came up wiht in a rush. I didn't spend too much time tweaking the look.
While FXAA does bring a lighter performance hit than more traditional MSAA, it still brings a significant performance hit unless either you were entirely processor bound (in which case, MSAA might carry no measurable performance hit either) or it's a badly coded game that was leaving the video card idle for a substantial amount of time at the end of each frame.
FXAA that isn't built into a game also carries the problem that it blurs things that shouldn't be blurred, such as any user interface components. If FXAA is built into the game directly, then you can tell it that this should be blurred and that shouldn't, so that it will leave things like text alone, but SweetFX has no way to figure that out. Don't get me wrong here; I like shader-based anti-aliasing if it's implemented properly. But you can't implement it properly through an external program, or even video drivers.
High dynamic range lighting is the real problem, though. Look at the stone slab to the left in the third pair of pictures. In the top picture, there's a bunch of detail. In the bottom picture, the portion in the light is solid white. The detail is simply gone. The reason is that that's what high dynamic range lighting does if you implement it stupidly. And without details of the game, SweetFX has no way of knowing how to implement it properly.
The way that modern graphics works is that for every pixel on the screen, you have to specify red, green, and blue values in the interval [0, 1]. You likely have various multiplications, additions, dot products, and so forth to get there, and likely also one or more texture lookup functions. High dynamic range just means we're going to change the interval for internal computations to something else, and then scale it. What SweetFX might be doing is something along the lines of taking the RGB values that the game outputs and then multiplying them by 1.5 or some such.
If you knew that for various reasons, your original RGB values were all going to be in the range [0, 0.5], then doubling them to use the whole color range makes sense. If you knew that they were going to be in the range [0, 2] and use that whole range, then multiplying them by 0.5 might make sense unless the only way to reach the numbers near the top are some glare where you're okay with it being clamped to solid white.
But making a sensible choice depends on knowing the internal details of the program, and how you arrive at the numbers you pick. You can easily have different max values in different circumstances (the "dynamic" part of high dynamic range). That's information that SweetFX doesn't have, though they likely rely on the end user picking sensible numbers. If broad areas get clamped to solid white, you're brightening it too much. That's not high contrast. That's no contrast in the white areas. I wouldn't be surprised if there are portions of the game that are completely unplayable at the settings you've chosen because colors that you need to be able to tell apart all go to solid white.
And that's why I said that you can't go backwards. If red, green, or blue values of either 0.8 and 0.9 both get mapped to 1.0, then that's not an injection, so it's not invertible. You can't take a solid white image and recover detail from it, as the detail was lost when different RGB values all got clamped to 1.0.
Oh boy you really know how to suck fun out of things don't you? thanks for the detailed information though. ;)
You can always download sweetfx and mess around with it and see what picture quality you can come up with in other words i would like to see your sensible choices. That is the only reason why i amde this topic so for those who are using sweetfx can share their settings with others.
Yes. SweetFX works a lot betetr when you disable ingame AA.