PDA

View Full Version : .50cal tracers to light?



fordfan25
02-21-2007, 07:02 PM
iv noticed sence switching from the 51,47 to the tempist that my gunnery skills have gone WAY up. i have recently come to relize that the biggist resone was do to me being able to see the 20mm tracers well. i have been flying 47 off line for a few days and noticed that i can hrdly see the red .50 tracers. i have tried adjusting my monitor ect to try and make the .50s tracers easier to see but have had no luck. i know there probly is not but is there a way to edit the config to darken them? also if any of you have the same prob and its not just me, then is this normal like IRL or should we ask for them to be a bit darker?

VW-IceFire
02-21-2007, 07:13 PM
The problem, I think, is the rendering engine and the way that red is handled I believe. The bitmaps are, apparently, the same size as the green or yellow ones, and yet you can hardly see them. We asked about this ages ago but I forget the specific response.

My suggestion is to use the narrow field of view to help when shooting. That way you can see the tracers at usable ranges.

HayateAce
02-21-2007, 07:16 PM
They are incorrect on purpose. A blind person could tell you there is a problemo. The oleg fanbois have gone along with these incorrect .50 tracers for years. Russian and German tracers have no such problems.

And the tracers need to be BRIGHTER not "darker."

Some folks on these boards have tried to fight against proper .50 tracers, "...black & white footage exaggerates, blah, blah, blah....."

Here's some color footage for them to watch.


OLEG BRIGHTEN .50 TRACERS (http://youtube.com/watch?v=48Mvy7uNHxY)

OAC_Kosh
02-21-2007, 07:24 PM
Yes, 50 cals are very hard to see.

Drop by our website and watch the movie on the main page to see 50 cals in action. Really bright white tracers. Real 50s look a lot more like Oleg's B-20 rounds.


http://www.oacsquad.com

fordfan25
02-21-2007, 07:47 PM
funny in those color vids the tracers apear to look yellow or whight like the in game 20mm hispanos.

VW-IceFire
02-21-2007, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by fordfan25:
funny in those color vids the tracers apear to look yellow or whight like the in game 20mm hispanos.
Thats the type of camera used. I said that too and was then promptly educated about how the tracers used in WWII are basically the same in use for small arms now and they are red.

Gibbage1
02-21-2007, 08:04 PM
Some time ago, I noticed the same thing. I did a quick visual test that consisted of trying to get a screenshot to show the most visible tracer from each gun.

http://www.gibbageart.com/files/tracertest.jpg

In each one of these screenshots, im holding down the trigger for a considerable ammount of time, so there are quite a few tracers. You can see this very clearly in the 109 shot. Also with thE ho-105's. With the M2 .50 cal on the Brewster, all you see are 2 small specs, even though there is a considerable line of them all the way to the water, were you see two hit.. The UBS you can still see some in the distance.

For all aircraft, all I did was point the nose, hold the trigger, and snap off a few screenshots in a row. I was able to capture the tacers easy in all aircraft EXCPET the Brewster on the 1st try! On the Brewster, I had to go in and repeatidly try and try and try to get a good shot of the tracers. After 15 mins and maybe 100 screenshots, what you see there is the best I could get!!!!! Im not cherry picking the worst one. If someone can grab a better screenshot of 2 M2's, be my guest.

These images are not resized. They are only cropped.

So yes, the .50's are VERY hard to see. Unless your 2000M away. Then they are big "come get me" flairs for the enemy to see.

HayateAce
02-21-2007, 08:05 PM
Puuuuuhleeeez.

You cannot tell me that Oleg's .50 tracers are anywhere near correct. Red yes, but in his game they have no CONTRAST to the surroundings: sky, clouds, water or land.

fordfan25
02-21-2007, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by HayateAce:
Puuuuuhleeeez.

You cannot tell me that Oleg's .50 tracers are anywhere near correct. Red yes, but in his game they have no CONTRAST to the surroundings: sky, clouds, water or land. yea thats what i ment when i said thay need to be darker to see. by darker i ment deeper in color.

HayateAce
02-21-2007, 09:29 PM
I guess I should reprhase: They should glow more. Someone do a screenie of an I~16 firing a stream of those crazy lime green star wars lasers.

Slide the green hue to RED and then tell me Oleg's game engine cannot pull it off.

jarink
02-21-2007, 09:35 PM
What I find odd is that in most ammunition, tracers do not have the same ballistics as the rest of the ammo (I have read this is especially true of the US .50 cal). IRL, if a US fighter pilot aimed by his tracers, he was almost sure to miss.

Still, it would be instersting to see some hard figures (such as type and amount of tracer filler) to compare between the different guns.

Breeze147
02-22-2007, 05:59 AM
Tracers are QUITE visible when they are coming AT you! Take my word for it!

HayateAce
02-22-2007, 06:59 AM
Which is the point Gibbage is making. From the pilot's view, the .50 tracers are almost invisible. For everyone else in your airspace, they are roman candle flares.

TgD Thunderbolt56
02-22-2007, 07:13 AM
Soooo...50's are porked? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Diablo310th
02-22-2007, 07:57 AM
Originally posted by TgD Thunderbolt56:
Soooo...50's are porked? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

LOL always have been T-Bolt http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

AVGWarhawk
02-22-2007, 08:07 AM
The .50 are hard to see. The color film of actual shooting make that clear. I do recall that CFS3 people said the .50 looked like flaming tennis balls when they loaded up that game. So if Oleg makes them big and shiny, I'm sure there will complaint on that. So it is what is.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BaronUnderpants
02-22-2007, 01:19 PM
Iv said from day one that i THINK the almost inviseble tracers of the 50`s is the biggest reason people complain about the "porked" 50 cals...simply because one cant see where u hit ( or even worse, dont see HOW u miss ).

Im pretty sure oleg made them more viseble in 4.03 or there abouts...but clearly not enough.

DKoor
02-22-2007, 01:59 PM
Actually weapon, however weak it may be is dangerous to be "tested" on a crappy damage-receiver platform such is a WW2 warplane.
Even in IL-2... there's always PK chance, radiator hit, fuel leak...
In IL-2 12,7mm damages/destroys E/A in short order as far as structural damage they inflict there's no problem.

Problem emerges however in two areas, perhaps they aren't so clear to see as most of you guys are pointing out *and* they don't set fuel tanks on fire often as some other small caliber do in game (tigertalon thoroughly tested this without any doubt some time ago).

Choctaw111
02-22-2007, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fordfan25:
funny in those color vids the tracers apear to look yellow or whight like the in game 20mm hispanos.
Thats the type of camera used. I said that too and was then promptly educated about how the tracers used in WWII are basically the same in use for small arms now and they are red. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They are red BUT VERY BRIGHT!!! Here is a tracer that I pulled from a casing dated 1944 and lit it with the heat of a propane torch. Make note that the flame you see is the tracer and NOT the torch. I was holding the tracer with a pair of pliers so as not to burn my fingers. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Also make note that this was a bright and sunny day. I posted this evidence about 2 years back and still no fix.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/PublicPhotoAccount2/50Cal.bmp

FritzGryphon
02-22-2007, 02:15 PM
I'm not sure why anyone is talking about color or brightness or opacity. In the screenshots kindly made by Gibbage, they all look equally bright, opaque and contrast to the surroundings.

However, the M2 tracer does look notably smaller. This is a more likely explanation as to why it can't be seen at a distance. Very soon after shooting it would be 1 pixel big, and then nothing.

I'd much prefer the small tracers on all, with tracer smoke. I understand that, to the naked eye in the real world, tracers are very apparent. However, they are not beach ball sized 3D spheres.

Choctaw, in your picture it looks like a fuzzy fist sized ball. If one were to compare the ingame tracer to the size of the pilot's hand, I'm sure it would be similar (or bigger!).

Like many other things, it's the limitation of the monitor that we can't make out small objects, and cannot differentiate between intesities (except for HDR bloom).

AVGWarhawk
02-22-2007, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by AVGWarhawk:
The .50 are hard to see. The color film of actual shooting make that clear. I do recall that CFS3 people said the .50 looked like flaming tennis balls when they loaded up that game. So if Oleg makes them big and shiny, I'm sure there will complaint on that. So it is what is.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Like I said, make it big bright and shiny, the complaints will come for that also. It is what it is and see that it will probably not be changed. Me, I would like them big and shiny http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

FritzGryphon
02-22-2007, 02:46 PM
I did a test to find relative size of M2 tracer.

http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/tracer1.jpg
http://members.shaw.ca/fennec/tracer2.jpg

The size of the tracer glow seems correct compared to the photograph. Much more correct than the other tracers.

I hope in BoB they're all 'little' like this, but with smoke.

KIMURA
02-22-2007, 02:47 PM
The tracer color should be like this - bright red, tending to pink. That seems very similar to the color Choctaw111 posted.

The tracer charge is a mixture of Strontium and Magnesium. Pure Strontium burn like this - on the pic below - whereas the Magnesium burns white. The result is a bright red/pink flame.
http://web.univ-pau.fr/~darrigan/chimie/jpg/flamme_Sr.jpg

Choctaw111
02-23-2007, 02:27 PM
The only difference in the tracer in engine is not its size really but the fact they are hard to see because the color is not bright enough. I should have taken a picture or movie of it from a quarter or half mile away and you would clearly see how visible they are from that distance. The ones we have now just fade away too quickly from the pilots perspective. From any other viewpoint they are clearly visible.

fordfan25
02-23-2007, 02:34 PM
yea i noticed this as well. may be something to do with the way thay are renderd.

StellarRat
02-23-2007, 02:53 PM
IIRC, the .50s are not drawn as nicely because Oleg was afraid of the frame rate impact they would have. Drawing a nice smoke trail and big fireball for six or more guns is big job for the graphics card. You'll notice that planes with less guns (not smaller guns) have better firing graphics. Remember, this game was coded four plus years ago when graphics cards were much less powerful.

Choctaw111
02-23-2007, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by StellarRat:
IIRC, the .50s are not drawn as nicely because Oleg was afraid of the frame rate impact they would have. Drawing a nice smoke trail and big fireball for six or more guns is big job for the graphics card. You'll notice that planes with less guns (not smaller guns) have better firing graphics. Remember, this game was coded four plus years ago when graphics cards were much less powerful.

Once again, wait for BoB. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Lurch1962
02-24-2007, 09:30 PM
The problem boils down to how in reality the eye can still easily see a bright point of light which is far below its resolution limit, as long as the luminance of that point is great enough to yield sufficient contrast.

Consider a star in the night sky. Even through the biggest telescope you could obtain it would still look like an unresolvable point of light (neglecting diffraction in the optical system, imperfections in the eye and blurring due to atmospheric turbulence). But as long as the sky is dark enough you'll see it.

CFS3 goes too far in its handling of tracers, but I'm sure a compromise can be arrived at. Perhaps instead of a yellow-orange "core" for IL2's red tracers, a pure white one would be better. Furthermore, simply maintaining the same luminance values as the point shrinks with distance results in its disappearance happening too soon.

Regarding long range visibility from different viewpoints... Remember that all tracers are drawn as a streak. If you look at it end-on, it appears as a small circle. From side-on its a line of considerable length. That's why you can so easily see tracers fired by planes from several kilometers away when they're moving across your line of sight (this bothers me, although my irritation is offset by the fact that I can locate a furball before the plane dots even begin to appear!) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

--Lurch--

WWMaxGunz
02-24-2007, 10:21 PM
In pyrotechnic (fireworks, flares, tracers sort of things) it is very easy to make a strong
red and much harder the other colors increasing away from red; orange, yellow, green, blue
and violet. The reason is simple. A photon of red is lower energy than the others, the same
amount of heat can produce more red photons and more molecules have red-producing electron
orbital jumps as well.

However the size of the dot and the amount of tracer burning along with how long that dot
takes to cover any distance are all factors to limit the number of photons released.

It's not something that can be decided from analysis here in any case but I would like to see
the red tracers using a more saturated red as a palette choice.