More realistic machine gun tracers?

[hoarmurath]

The difference is, speed at which the camera record images, sensibility of the film, time of exposition (given by speed of recording), and the fact the camera is mounted on a moving, vibrating frame.

Lots of factors that have nothing to do with the actual tracers.

Yet, i did shooting when i was in the military, and we fired tracers, and i never thought they were looking like lasers, because they weren't. Cameras can see them as lasers, but our eye doesn't.

As far as i can remember, tracers looked just like tiny color lights flying very fast to the target, it lasted very short time, less than a second.

[Friendly_flyer]

Originally Posted by tread_head

Just throwing my hat in since after three tours in Iraq, I've seen tracers from 120mm, 25mm, .50, 7.62, and 5.56 fired in combat. Tracer fire, especially from machine guns, looks like a point of light moving away from you when viewed from behind.

Served in Norwegian army, and have fired 9mm, 7,62 NATO and 12,7 HMG rounds and can conform your description. I too find the tracers are a tad light and too long from the clips we have seen so far (I have to get my new rig before playing the game).

[choctaw111]

The tracers in Cliffs of Dover are the most realistic I have seen in any simulation or game.
However, they do appear too "thick" (at close range) from the photos and vids I've seen.
Make them a little thinner and they will be perfect.

Here is a good film showing tracers. Start watching at 1:20.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFKT_...eature=related

Here is another good one from Germany.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgmDi...eature=related

[ChrisDNT]

"Here is a good film..."

A good FILM...

And if your eyes are not video cameras...

[choctaw111]

Originally Posted by ChrisDNT

"Here is a good film..."

A good FILM...

And if your eyes are not video cameras...

I don't understand the problem.
These movies are showing the same thing that my eyes have seen.
That's what makes it a good film.

[[URU]AkeR]

I have seen many answers to this tracers topics (many have been created) from ppl that has actually fired tracers, and some of them have slight different perception of what they saw, so i imagine that even different eyes - brains percieve tracers in different ways.
So I think the coclusion is that representation of tracers in COD are faithfull enough.

Another interesting conclusion is that ppl should do a little search on the forum before posting about things that have been largely debated in many threads.

[McDaniel]

Originally Posted by choctaw111

The tracers in Cliffs of Dover are the most realistic I have seen in any simulation or game.
However, they do appear too "thick" (at close range) from the photos and vids I've seen.
Make them a little thinner and they will be perfect.

Here is a good film showing tracers. Start watching at 1:20.

Here is another good one from Germany.

SWITZERLAND is not Germany!!!



McDan out

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by hoarmurath

The difference is, speed at which the camera record images, sensibility of the film, time of exposition (given by speed of recording), and the fact the camera is mounted on a moving, vibrating frame.

yes, that's right... camera mounted on a stable surface or on a surface subject to vibration...

the human eye will see after an image from a moving bright light source - it is inescapable

[mazex]

Originally Posted by hoarmurath

The difference is, speed at which the camera record images, sensibility of the film, time of exposition (given by speed of recording), and the fact the camera is mounted on a moving, vibrating frame.

Lots of factors that have nothing to do with the actual tracers.

Yet, i did shooting when i was in the military, and we fired tracers, and i never thought they were looking like lasers, because they weren't. Cameras can see them as lasers, but our eye doesn't.

As far as i can remember, tracers looked just like tiny color lights flying very fast to the target, it lasted very short time, less than a second.

+1, I have fired many thousands of M240 tracers and I remember Oleg acknowledging that CloD uses the "non vibrating camera exposure tracer effect", aka lasers with a length of a few meters (the distance a tracer goes while the camera shutter is open). In real life like you say they are just tiny dots racing away as the eye has no shutter speed... But that is not completely true so some shutter lag feeling is present IRL too

[DK-nme]

In CloD it's like the tracers are all flying almost perfect in line - like linked together on a string so to speak (no recoil effect what so ever). And the tracer (mesh) itself is nothing near what is seen on those videos (in game it's too fat, too perfect and always the same length - it's like perfection distorts the human perception of reality).
What I see on almost any live video showing tracer efx is, that recoil yet makes a slightly difference and the tracers doesn't seem to be totally straightflying (the same path/arc).
This is very visible on both the Oerliker and the Rheinmetall night shooting videos. Especially when seen from behind the line of fire - one sees, that the line is no way near perfect. Seen from distance and not from behind the line of fire, this becomes very difficult to spot (like perpendicular to the direction). Hopefully, U all get my point (sorry for my bad english).
And yes, from behind the weapon, tracers ought to be dots, not strings. Actually very well made in the arcade sim game, Wings of Prey - among many other slightly better graphicly details compared to CloD.

So all in all, and thus the fact, this has been discussed multiple times, the original Author of this thread, has a point, which ought to be reckoned with - changed or implemented.

Just my 25 cents...


DK-nme