Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Aerial Photographs of the UK, Hundreds of them; and Bird's-eye View of Trees

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - Aerial Photographs of the UK, Hundreds of them; and Bird's-eye View of Trees (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=32193)

Brenzett.....your'e another one of us Kent mob.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bongodriver (Post 426958)

Brenzett.....your'e another one of us Kent mob.

In London at the moment unfortunately, but manage to escape now and then :)

Manston aren't you ?

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha (Post 426962)

In London at the moment unfortunately, but manage to escape now and then :)

Manston aren't you ?

.

Yes, was also working out of Biggin hill until recently.

Most of those shots are under-exposed...not the best example

Quote:

Originally Posted by BH_woodstock (Post 426916)

outstanding pictures of the cliffs.I think they did a great job rendering them in the game.
the pictures with the hurricanes looks fake for some reason.I dont doubt they are real but it looks like they are taken straight out of Dover ;)

Hi Woody,
Those pics of the Hurris are in the http://www.kbobm.org/ just down the road from my house.:cool:

Quote:

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha (Post 426949)

Brenzett's falling on hard times too, I pop in there for a chat whenever its open and I'm down that way.

Nice people there .

http://www.brenzettaero.co.uk/Museum-001.html

Back on topic

You have to remember that the camera shots are enhanced to give a enriched foliage look to the ground and sky for that matter.

I took this shot up the Pyrenees (French Side) and gave it some adjustments in PS4 to make it look "richer"
although its a great looking view in real life the enhancement is false as in most of the above shots.

What we see with the MkI eyeball and our brain interprets is different from a cameras image
so we enhance it to make it look better to compensate for the original impression we felt or think it should look like.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...CF1889copy.jpg

Anyway were not flying a scenery simulator, but the feel of CoD at certain times of day is pretty good compared to anything else I've seen.

.

when i can fly threw this wonderful valley in Dover??Will it ever be available?

Quote:

Originally Posted by =GI=Joel (Post 427005)

Hi Woody,
Those pics of the Hurris are in the http://www.kbobm.org/ just down the road from my house.:cool:

go there and take a picture for me Joel. after all these years i sure would like to see yer ugly mug :grin:

~S~ bro. been great seeing you again.

edit: i dont care if its @ the Pub down the road. send me a pic...lol
you got my addy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha (Post 426949)

...

You have to remember that the camera shots are enhanced to give a enriched foliage look to the ground and sky for that matter.

I took this shot up the Pyrenees (French Side) and gave it some adjustments in PS4 to make it look "richer"
although its a great looking view in real life the enhancement is false as in most of the above shots.

What we see with the MkI eyeball and our brain interprets is different from a cameras image
so we enhance it to make it look better to compensate for the original impression we felt or think it should look like.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...CF1889copy.jpg

Anyway were not flying a scenery simulator, but the feel of CoD at certain times of day is pretty good compared to anything else I've seen.

Yes you are right about photography's difference from scenes in real life. Actually I myself had added a note of this at first, "Although what a photograph shows us (i.e. what the camera tells us) is not exactly the same thing as what we see with the naked eye, but..."; at last however I deleted it, thinking that saying it would require lots of explanation. Now, here is the explanation:

Despite that fact that what photography shows is slightly different from what the naked eye sees, and that a photo's colours can also be enriched to make it look better (also more false, so to speak), the resultant photograph is still telling many basic truths, such as the relative darkness of the woods to the ground, and the variation in colour of the woods. You don't say a woman is 'false' when she has done some enhancement on her face by means of cosmetics, and as before her eyebrows are still darker than her skin.

Your photo can also explain my ideas when it is un-enriched.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1337306857
Here the lush colours of the original image are gone, and the image will be very close to reality if my colour reduction was not overdone. The 2 facts remain unchanged: that the trees are generally darker than the ground around them, and that there is colour variation (mainly cold-warm alteration) in the sparse woods. Actually these facts are still present when you de-colour it so much that it is almost black and white, below:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1337306857

:) So we need to be aware that truths should not be thrown away when there are some small blemishes accompanying them. And the photos I posted are still a readable reference for the CoD players, and hopefully also for the developer.

~

Quote:

Originally Posted by BH_woodstock (Post 426916)

I think they did a great job rendering them in the game.

Definitely. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buchon (Post 426957)

Just a note :

-Most of that photos are not in summer time, while in BoB was, so the grass should be less green and the trees too due the summers´s time sun effects.

I think that the main difference between those photos and CLOD is that the treetops are too thin in the game while in the photos they have more volume.

It was during the summer and autumn of 1940 (July–September 1940).

You will arrive at other conclusions when comparing colour relationships within the photos and the corresponding colour relationships within CoD. ;)

Treetops in the sim are too thin; this is something important I shoud have added.