I honestly think in those screenshots it barely makes a difference, but for arguments sake I'll say the first one looks best ^_^
I think subtle differences are not really the point, its VERY dark areas people complain about, and likewise I dislike VERY light areas.
On a scale of brightness out of 10, I like around 4 - darker than normal, but not so dark its stupid. Dark GENERALLY gives a much more atmospheric map, but of course it can be done with light areas as well...
mendasp: I would like a picture with the same area of the screenie in ONE picture to see the difference. but I would vote for pic number 1. but the screenshots CANT represent what the map will look ingame, I found out thats its near to impossible to recreate the effect of the gamma value by using photoshop because you dont know the values exactly.
no offense but a bad example for "fixing" lightning in a map is eclipse. now this map is bright as hell, therefor I dont like the atmosphere anymore. another example is tanith. the map is completely overbright in my eyes but screenshots of tanith without gamma correction look quite decent.
and disco monkey I also agree to what you said. I cant create a map and thinking about how it comes out on other people monitors. thats just a waste of time. thats why a pc gives many ways of "customisation" to the player. personally set the hightest possible gamma value within ns but I dont use any tools to brighten up the signal from the graphics card. ns looks nice and colorful, some bright spots, some dark spots where I dont see enemies when they hide and I dont look carefully. and that are the settings I will use while creating my map. full stop.
Rendy_CZechLife is a KoanJoin Date: 2003-10-11Member: 21608Members
U can easly simulate gamma from game on screens. Example:
I'm using gamma 1.5. I took screenshot, open in Photopaint (or in another advanced graphic program) then I import the same screenshot over the old one, but I set the mode of this imported object to "Add" and transparency to 50% (If I'm using gamma 1.7 then I will set transparency to 30% etc. ). The result looks like ingame. Dunno if I explained it right...
Comments
I think subtle differences are not really the point, its VERY dark areas people complain about, and likewise I dislike VERY light areas.
On a scale of brightness out of 10, I like around 4 - darker than normal, but not so dark its stupid. Dark GENERALLY gives a much more atmospheric map, but of course it can be done with light areas as well...
I would like a picture with the same area of the screenie in ONE picture to see the difference. but I would vote for pic number 1. but the screenshots CANT represent what the map will look ingame, I found out thats its near to impossible to recreate the effect of the gamma value by using photoshop because you dont know the values exactly.
no offense but a bad example for "fixing" lightning in a map is eclipse. now this map is bright as hell, therefor I dont like the atmosphere anymore. another example is tanith. the map is completely overbright in my eyes but screenshots of tanith without gamma correction look quite decent.
and disco monkey I also agree to what you said. I cant create a map and thinking about how it comes out on other people monitors. thats just a waste of time. thats why a pc gives many ways of "customisation" to the player. personally set the hightest possible gamma value within ns but I dont use any tools to brighten up the signal from the graphics card. ns looks nice and colorful, some bright spots, some dark spots where I dont see enemies when they hide and I dont look carefully. and that are the settings I will use while creating my map. full stop.
I'm using gamma 1.5. I took screenshot, open in Photopaint (or in another advanced graphic program) then I import the same screenshot over the old one, but I set the mode of this imported object to "Add" and transparency to 50% (If I'm using gamma 1.7 then I will set transparency to 30% etc. ). The result looks like ingame. Dunno if I explained it right...