The concept with LODs is alright (and necessary from the technical point of view because the 3d model needs to get less and less complex when further away (= less polygons), it just needs to be tweaked a bit I guess.

For the record. Depth of field does not apply for objects further away than about four meters. Not if you want to simulate the way our eyes sees reality.

An enemy aircraft at a distance closer than four metres will definitely stand out against the background, but for a more obvious reason:-)

The current problem is that when the black spot turn into the first LOD level, the plane is so far way that you just lost the track of it. If they tune that transition (black spot to first LOD level) to a closer distance, lets say about the dist you can start to identify the plane, we will have less problems. I think that will be easy to do, it's just a tunning matter.
Again, an over tuned highlight surface sun reflection effect, will help too.

That could be a good solution too.

Not the case according to real WWII pilots I talked to.

According to them, and I have seen this written in other accounts, the big difference between experienced pilots and rookies, was the ability to focus the eye on several different distances on the same patch of sky when scanning for enemy aircraft. This was a learned skill. A enemy aircraft at a given distance might be missed by the rookie who was focusing only at one particular distance.

i agree with your logic, but there is one problem with that,

when in il2/CoD the very distant "aircraft dot" transitions to the first and then 2e Lod level, it does so because the LoD is actually an object that is LARGER then the previous 4 pixel "dot" (as it should, a closer aircraft should be larger). our problem is that these most distant 2 or 3 LoD levels (getting each time larger as we come closer) are made up of little jumbled clusters of pixels that keeps changing shape (as illustrated earlier in this thread), the end result being your eyes cant focus very well on this cluster of moving pixels and it blends in with the background to much.

keeping these more distant LoD levels as a "dot" for longer will still make them relatively hard to spot (compared to real life situation, because the object should gradually become larger and easier to spot as you get closer). a potentially better solution would be to have them turn into something like for ex a little "blue water droplet" type shape, with the "droplet" getting gradually larger (but lighter in color ?) at the same points in distance that the next 2 or 3 LoD models would engage (blue might be a good choice for this so they wont stand out to much against open sky, because a progressively larger black dot would then stand out to much). that is just one suggestion of how it might work, others here might come up with better idea's

as the object gets closer, it might be sufficient to have the LoD model painted with a black border on its surface (as the OP suggested), so these closer aircraft LoD models stands out more against the background, but this imho would not be sufficient for the most distant LoD models that are just displayed as an incoherent jumble of little pixels (see earlier illustration in this thread)

the problem with that is that the same "reflection" effect also acts on other objects, like houses etc.(as seen in slipballs first track posted recently here) the end result is that the effect (currently) is to strong and the distant aircraft stand out TO MUCH, and lots of other visual effects affect the quality of the scenery to. but we'r on the right track, at least more people are starting to recognize we do have a problem spotting/tracking distant aircraft and ground targets like trucks/tanks (compared to visibility in real life).

You won't get your "reality" with current technology... sorry

Depth of Field applies all the way out to infinity, sorry to say... especially when modifying the FoV in projecting a 3d image onto a 2d screen. :rolleyes:

Yep at 1200m, really only when there is a contrasting back ground such as the concrete, can the aircraft be identified as such. Tanks definitely have zero glitter output so that's a problem, but should be expected to be that way. What I should have done was use a winter skin here and there, and even put a couple of Su 26 on the field.

has anybody actually looked in detail at the LoD models themselves in CoD ? (i think there are 7 for each aircraft)

if some people are reporting a "vanishing" aircraft (several people mentioned this about trying to keep track of a spitfire) from relatively close up (say 500 meters), it is possible that there is an additional issue with LoD model errors, ie in how correct the LoD model drawings/representations are (this could be an issue with the big rush of getting CoD ready for release). like the infamous seafire in the il2 series that was missing wings on the 2e and 3e LoD model, making it MUCH harder to spot once it transitions to the smaller LoD's.

the only way i know to check LoD models in CoD is to zoom out on a paused aircraft suspended against open blue sky, and take a screen shot of each progressive Lod model, and then magnify these screen shots and see exactly how "complete" each aircraft is represented, and the color scheme used for that LoD. there might be a better way (by looking at specific files for ex), but with the amount of vanishing aircraft problems reported by some, i think that might be worth consideration.

I think the majority of the problem has to do with the lack of AA.
http://www.rdox.info/01.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/02.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/8.jpghttp://www.rdox.info/9.jpg