New Landscape Colors vs Old

[Mad G]

Nice pics, thanks. The third one is like I see a BOB real look landscape and seems that wouldn´t be too hard to achieve these colours in CloD, imo. Also trees, tree´s pockets and bushes disposal are different in game.

[bw_wolverine]

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

Agree with everything you just said , but they are a little too bright.. I am fed up with neon nuclear green statements being shoved down my throat!!!

*nods*

I would keep in mind that almost every picture I've seen that shows the "real" colours (photos, etc) is typically on an overcast day. fruitbats pictures seem to mostly be on clear days, but some of the greens in those are pretty "green" too.

If your PC can do it, try creating a mission with the weather features turned on and take a few screen shots. You may be surprised at how right the colours look if you actually have cloud cover. It's possible that the devs are tweaking the colours with that in mind. I'm sure it's very tricky to manage the colours when so many things can have an impact on them (shade, sun, glare, glass tint, haze, etc).

Wouldn't we hate to have to do all of this over again once the weather features are implimented and everyone complains that the ground is too dark when the sky is cloudy?

[fruitbat]

yep although the greens are subduing now, a month or so ago, much more 'green' on a clear day, this is from last years harvest in early aug i think, and when the sun is shining its quite vibrant.

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by bw_wolverine

*nods*

I would keep in mind that almost every picture I've seen that shows the "real" colours (photos, etc) is typically on an overcast day. fruitbats pictures seem to mostly be on clear days, but some of the greens in those are pretty "green" too.

If your PC can do it, try creating a mission with the weather features turned on and take a few screen shots. You may be surprised at how right the colours look if you actually have cloud cover. It's possible that the devs are tweaking the colours with that in mind. I'm sure it's very tricky to manage the colours when so many things can have an impact on them (shade, sun, glare, glass tint, haze, etc).

Wouldn't we hate to have to do all of this over again once the weather features are implimented and everyone complains that the ground is too dark when the sky is cloudy?

LMAO, thats exactly what I thought with Beta patch 1.. clearly great minds think alike

[philip.ed]

When I said even, I should have said organic. The regions are, largely, a mixture of crop fields on top of grassland. At the end of the day, grass will always vary slightly in colour, but not as drastically as shown in CloD. The crop fields...colours and positioning are anyones guess, but largely, there will be lots of grass-areas together in fairly large areas, with the crop fields in-between. CloD shows a mixture of each together like a chequerboard (a chequerboard made up of lots of lots of varying shades of white and black/grey). Does this make sense? I submit to your superiority in this department, fruitbat

So sorry, misunderstanding on my part, but I feel that we are both suggesting towards a similar conclusion?

[Ailantd]

Photos are not examples of anything. Photos can be extremely different in colors, saturation and lighting between them and between reality only changing camera parameters like exposure and so on. You should not compare colors in a photograph. I believe more what people living in England can say about landscape. Even more pilots living in England.

[fruitbat]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

When I said even, I should have said organic. The regions are, largely, a mixture of crop fields on top of grassland. At the end of the day, grass will always vary slightly in colour, but not as drastically as shown in CloD. The crop fields...colours and positioning are anyones guess, but largely, there will be lots of grass-areas together in fairly large areas, with the crop fields in-between. CloD shows a mixture of each together like a chequerboard (a chequerboard made up of lots of lots of varying shades of white and black/grey). Does this make sense? I submit to your superiority in this department, fruitbat

So sorry, misunderstanding on my part, but I feel that we are both suggesting towards a similar conclusion?

irl, rule of thumb, anything thats not to steep to cultivate, will be cultivated, everything else thats not woodland will be pasture for livestock. If lands of to poor quality for crops again pasture for livestock.

I do agree with you the colours are off, i look at them and can't actually guess whats supposed to be represented in half the fields, lol.

for SE Kent, can't really speak for anywhere else, more land is used for crops than anything else, its good ground, its not called the garden of england for no reason.

your very right that the grass should be pretty uniform, it is what it is.....

If i was designing the textures, i would of picked august as the month to represent in the map as its in the middle of the battle, and you can kinda represent both july and sept with that look as well, and the textures would of been placed with the grass pastures on all of the contours, with ripe wheat colours for the fields, which could be all sorts of things, oats rye barley etc (and a cut stubble field will look just the same colour as a ripe crop field from the air)... much the same colour as some of the textures on the slovakia map in il2, interspersed with woodland, and with some fields of darker greens to represent a few of the other types of crops (root crops).

Oh, and there would be lots of sheaf's of wheat in the fields, as it was before combines, and it would of been cut and bundled into sheaf's in the fields for a while, again like you see in the slovakia map in il2.

But thats me.

Here's a video from a flight from Germany to England obviously England coming at the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7WnWpy4LGI

It is indeed rather green than coloured however I don't know at which season this shot was taken. (I just skipped through the video though) At different seasons this might look different.

However one can clearly see that the colours are quite vivid.

Here is another one. Flight pictures also on the last half.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2Sae3CUpto

Occasionally it does look like the patchwork of Clod

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by fruitbat

irl, rule of thumb, anything thats not to steep to cultivate, will be cultivated, everything else thats not woodland will be pasture for livestock. If lands of to poor quality for crops again pasture for livestock.

I do agree with you the colours are off, i look at them and can't actually guess whats supposed to be represented in half the fields, lol.

for SE Kent, can't really speak for anywhere else, more land is used for crops than anything else, its good ground, its not called the garden of england for no reason.

your very right that the grass should be pretty uniform, it is what it is.....

If i was designing the textures, i would of picked august as the month to represent in the map as its in the middle of the battle, and you can kinda represent both july and sept with that look as well, and the textures would of been placed with the grass pastures on all of the contours, with ripe wheat colours for the fields, which could be all sorts of things, oats rye barley etc (and a cut stubble field will look just the same colour as a ripe crop field from the air)... much the same colour as some of the textures on the slovakia map in il2, interspersed with woodland, and with some fields of darker greens to represent a few of the other types of crops (root crops).

Oh, and there would be lots of sheaf's of wheat in the fields, as it was before combines, and it would of been cut and bundled into sheaf's in the fields for a while, again like you see in the slovakia map in il2.

But thats me.

I completely agree. Hopefully Luthier will be able to sieve the construvtive, well evidenced, comments from the largely uneducated/fanboi ones.