Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 1 of 11
Forum » SpaceEngine » Troubleshooting and Solutions » Most realistic graphics settings
Most realistic graphics settings
ChromeBallzDate: Monday, 01.08.2016, 13:44 | Message # 1
Space Tourist
Group: Users
Netherlands
Messages: 23
Status: Offline
Since the last version, the settings changed just a tiny bit, but i can't seem to figure out how to get them set up in such a way that i get the most realistic imagery. The standard settings are certainly cinematic, but not entirely realistic to say the least :)

I've been playing around a bit, but i don't really know how every setting connects to the others and how to get that realism i'm aiming for. Can anyone give me some pointers?

Secondary issue: I assume a higher landscape LOD means more detailed landscapes? Since i remember LOD settings should be negative to get the best results, so i'm a bit confused :P
 
MosfetDate: Monday, 01.08.2016, 15:23 | Message # 2
World Builder
Group: Users
Italy
Messages: 711
Status: Offline
Best LOD settings are positive. Currently max value capped to 1 in graphics menu settings, it can be set to higher values from the console window with the command:

set LandLOD <value>





"Time is illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Douglas N. Adams
My mods
Asus x555ub: cpu i5-6200u - ram 4gb - gpu nvidia geforce 940m 2gb vram
 
Bells_TheoremDate: Monday, 01.08.2016, 17:20 | Message # 3
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 188
Status: Offline
To get realism I turn "Auto Exposure" on and turn on "Real Planet Brightness". This sets a flat exposure for all entities that is relative to all entities.

So if you are close to the host star (like earth) and your exposure is set to the day side, space will appear black and featureless. But if you are exposing for the night side the stars and brighter galactic features will appear.

Also if you go to the outer solar system it will be very dim but when you adjust the exposure to light objects out there, then space comes to life. Great for matching exposure of nebula with the dimmer outer objects.

I also max out LOD to decrease the size of polygons.
 
FireintheholeDate: Monday, 01.08.2016, 18:36 | Message # 4
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Sweden
Messages: 356
Status: Offline
There are those who claim Real Planet Brightness is less realistic, and those who claim it's more realistc. I personally think it's more realistic, because it won't make every planet equally bright. Those who think it's unrealistic, will say it's more realistic to have it turned off because of the exposure of the human eye (or a camera) will adjust to the lesser light.

In my opinion:
Auto-exposure ON
Diffraction spikes ON and NORMAL
Diffration spikes ASTRONIKI 3
Lens flares OFF (the human eye has no such effect)
Real Planet Brightness ON
Real Star Brightness ON
Limiting magnitude 8.0 (this is the limit of the human eye in extremely dark locations, such as outer space)
Bloom = 0
Star Scale = 1.0
Star Overbright = 1.995
Star Saturation = 3.162





Love SpaceEngine!
 
Bells_TheoremDate: Monday, 01.08.2016, 19:17 | Message # 5
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 188
Status: Offline
I'm in the Real Planet Brightness ON camp. I prefer to start with the expected exposure values, then adjust the global exposure settings to adapt to dimmer or brighter surfaces.

I love bringing up the brightness to expose nebula when exploring the outer regions of a solar system.

I haven't seen any noticeable effects with Real Star Brighness ON.
 
parameciumkidDate: Monday, 01.08.2016, 20:05 | Message # 6
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 277
Status: Offline
In case there's any remaining confusion:
High LOD values (e.g. +2) look prettier because the minimum size of a given feature is smaller, so the terrain gets more small details like rocks and crags.
Low LOD values (e.g. -2) are often recommended when people complain about SpaceEngine crashing or running slowly, because they make the game render less detailed terrain, giving it an easier time. By "best results," people are referring to performance rather than visual appeal.





Intel HD Graphics 4000 ;P
 
ProteusDate: Tuesday, 02.08.2016, 00:54 | Message # 7
Explorer
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 172
Status: Offline
Quote Fireinthehole ()
Lens flares OFF (the human eye has no such effect)


There must be something wrong with my eyes, then, when looking toward a street light at night. surprised







Edited by Proteus - Tuesday, 02.08.2016, 00:54
 
FireintheholeDate: Tuesday, 02.08.2016, 10:34 | Message # 8
Pioneer
Group: Translators
Sweden
Messages: 356
Status: Offline
Quote Proteus ()
There must be something wrong with my eyes, then, when looking toward a street light at night.

I should have said lens ghost effect. smile





Love SpaceEngine!
 
swimswam1339Date: Thursday, 18.08.2016, 05:07 | Message # 9
Observer
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 17
Status: Offline
Anyone know the best eye candy settings? The settings with the best possible visuals, my pc could probably handle it biggrin




The young and the old, just numbers.
 
HornblowerDate: Thursday, 18.08.2016, 20:45 | Message # 10
World Builder
Group: Users
United States
Messages: 701
Status: Offline
swimswam1339, well the first step would be to put bloom on maximum, then you should turn up Diff. Spike size to about two, then turn up overbright and desaturate dim stars. Finally, hang out around nebulae
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Troubleshooting and Solutions » Most realistic graphics settings
Page 1 of 11
Search: