Prepar3D V4.4 with PBR Engine Released

[gman5250]

Prepar3D V4.4 just released with full PBR support. Looks like I'll be doing a clean install...again.:encouragement:

From the P3D Latest News:

"A focal point of this release is the core rendering engine has been updated to fully support Physically Based Rendering (PBR) laying the groundwork for next-level realism and unparalleled graphical fidelity in a full earth simulator."

[Mach3DS]

I read the SDK last night. Looks like it's slightly different than DCS or War Thunder as far as how they use RGBA but the nice thing is all you need to do is swap locations of your various channels

[Priller]

Very excited about this! Wondering what else they've changed!

Priller

[TuFun]

Hoping LM will someday add self reflection as in War Thunder and iL2 Sturmovik. It's stunning to look at!

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/uploads/monthly_2018_10/Jug_1_Default.jpg.9c2423ddfcc3aeb2cbdf75914c584577 .jpg

[Javis]

So what do you boys think of the PBR effect as seen on the F-16 in v4.4 ?..... Does it cover your expectations ??...

Here's what *i* see on my machine about that after updating client and content to 4.4 :

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/P3Dv4/4.43.jpg

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/P3Dv4/4.44.jpg

Pretty bad, huh..... ( as in quite wonderful really )

Very curious about how other models will look with PBR activated.

[Daube]

Thanks for these big screens ! Finally I can see the effects of this PBR. Believe it or not, these are actually the very first screenshot I see about the 4.4 Falcon...

One question though: did they rebuild the VC model?
The reason I ask: yesterday, I have tried this F-16 for the first time, in P3Dv4.3 (client is 4.4, but content is still 4.3), with a VR helmet.
I realized that the virtual cockpit is too small ! It is made for a kid or some very small person, probably :D
Basically, it's out of scale. Completely.
Because of this, it's unusable in VR... I was hoping this plane would get some model update in 4.4, perhaps ?

[gman5250]

So what do you boys think of the PBR effect as seen on the F-16 in v4.4 ?..... Does it cover your expectations ??...

Here's what *i* see on my machine about that after updating client and content to 4.4

Pretty bad, huh..... ( as in quite wonderful really )

Very curious about how other models will look with PBR activated.

Those are fantastic caps Jan. I'm going to be downloading tonight, then the install will take a couple of days to get everything plugged in. I've been converting all of my work to PBR for the last few months. This week I completely renovated my KBIH Easter Sierra Regional scenery to update the buildings and ground polys for full PBR. I've been focusing on this for quite a long time now, so I'm very excited to see the results.

Once the sim is up to full song, I'll shoot some caps and video of a full PBR scenery and one of my PBR aircraft.

Glad to see you share the enthusiasm I do for the PBR engine. :encouragement:

[Javis]

Thanks for these big screens ! Finally I can see the effects of this PBR. Believe it or not, these are actually the very first screenshot I see about the 4.4 Falcon...

One question though: did they rebuild the VC model?
The reason I ask: yesterday, I have tried this F-16 for the first time, in P3Dv4.3 (client is 4.4, but content is still 4.3), with a VR helmet.
I realized that the virtual cockpit is too small ! It is made for a kid or some very small person, probably :D
Basically, it's out of scale. Completely.
Because of this, it's unusable in VR... I was hoping this plane would get some model update in 4.4, perhaps ?

Well, i'm certainly not an F-16 expert, Daube, but i don't have the feeling something is changed in the VC. I can't say i see much of PBR effects in the VC textures neither. Atleast not like i see it on the external textures. Certainly makes for extra realism, love it.

Then again, alas i still have never experienced anything in VR.... So i can't tell anything about that regarding the F-16 VC. I am very much looking forward to VR in our flightsims but i still feel it's not exactly the time yet. (Am i right ??.... ;-) ( and i probabely will need a new rig... )

cheers,
jan

[Javis]

Those are fantastic caps Jan. I'm going to be downloading tonight, then the install will take a couple of days to get everything plugged in. I've been converting all of my work to PBR for the last few months. This week I completely renovated my KBIH Easter Sierra Regional scenery to update the buildings and ground polys for full PBR. I've been focusing on this for quite a long time now, so I'm very excited to see the results.

Once the sim is up to full song, I'll shoot some caps and video of a full PBR scenery and one of my PBR aircraft.

That would be mighty interesting, Gordon, looking forward to it !


Can you explain a little about what PBR will mean to groundpoly's, Gordon ? Thanks! ( or skip that and just show us.... :cool: )


Glad to see you share the enthusiasm I do for the PBR engine. :encouragement:

You bet !

It may not look like it just yet but i can maybe imagine it will turn out that PBR will have the same impact that reflectivity and specular light once had on our sim visual experience. Love it ! I'm sure there'll come a time we can't do without it anymore. ;-)

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/P3Dv4/v44f16.jpg

cheers,
jan

[blanston12]

Having just upgraded from 4.3 to 4.4 and trying the F-16 both before and after I can't say I saw any differences in the VC, but I have also never tried VR.

[gman5250]

Can you explain a little about what PBR will mean to groundpoly's, Gordon ? Thanks! ( or skip that and just show us.... :cool: )

Probably the biggest thing will be the availability of specular and bump mapping on ground polys, but the entire process is going to become more intuitive. I haven't begun to work with the current SDK, and I think it will be a process learning how to use new features fully, but from what I have experimented with the last couple of years I would anticipate that ground polys and scenery objects will become as important as Virtual Cockpits.

Until now, developers have been limited to textures that they have created from photos, or Photoshop. Developing with PBR tools will change all of that. Suites like Quixel or Substance Painter let the developer create extremely complex and realistic textures for terrain, vegetation, structures and vehicles. For ground polys, an artist can tailor every square meter of ground to suit regional and seasonal requirements. The only limits are, of course, going to be the ability of the CPU and GPU to manage those assets, but that technology along with 64 bit platforms will improve with time.

My work has been focused in this area for at least three years, and my projects are ready for a full PBR engine....I hope. lol
As soon as I am able to install the new P3D I'll know for sure.

I'll post up a couple of screens, and make a vid for the PBR thread. I'm sure there will be a lot to talk about.

[Dimus]

Gordon, specular and bump maps were already available in P3D for GPs, I believe also in v3.5. I’m sure though that now, if one uses PBR tools to develop them, the results would be much more impressive.

Lots of reading to do and your thread and videos are a great source.

[falcon409]

So what do you boys think of the PBR effect as seen on the F-16 in v4.4 ?..... Does it cover your expectations ??...

Here's what *i* see on my machine about that after updating client and content to 4.4 :

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/P3Dv4/4.43.jpg

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/P3Dv4/4.44.jpg

Pretty bad, huh..... ( as in quite wonderful really )

Very curious about how other models will look with PBR activated.
Totally unrelated to the current topic, but relevant to those who will utilize PBR for aircraft texturing, and more specifically Military Aircraft. I have a real problem with artists who feel the need to "dirty up" the appearance of fighters as though by their very nature and type of role they play it will show how "used" they are.

After 26 years of working on Fighters, from the F-100 to the F-16 and many in between, there isn't a Crew Chief worth his salt that would allow his airplane to look like the ones depicted here. It makes no difference if it's here at home base or somewhere in some far flung desert base. Two things are always on their minds "Corrosion control and cleanliness". Airplanes are cleaned daily before and after sorties (wiped down, grease spots or fuel streaks eliminated. . .canopy transparencies wiped and polished intermittently). Aircraft also get a visit to the wash rack at predetermined intervals. CC's take great pride in maintaining "their airplane" and having it not only Combat ready at all times but also devoid of any corrosive sediment, oils, moisture etc.

So please consider what actual aircraft really look like when doing your repaints. Just because it's an airplane that's been in-service for 20 years, doesn't mean it's supposed to show that many layers of dirt.

[rvn817j]

No disrespect to Crew Chiefs (or the Air Force), but those who operate from cushy land airbases (where the golf course is built before the runway...lol) don't appreciate that others have to operate from sea based carriers where wash racks and wide open maintenance spaces are not available. Most of the fresh water on a carrier goes toward drinking and showers, little is left for washing equipment and aircraft. Corrosion is accelerated by sea salt air (and the occasional splash over the rail).

Don't get me wrong, I really like the "look and smell of a new car", but, at least in the Navy, that "look and smell" didn't last long into the first cruise! Carry on!

[gman5250]

Ed...I agree completely. The exceptions are WWII or WWI aircraft in theater, where they were used hard and put up wet. Even then they were maintained as well as could be expected. More contemporary aircraft would be maintained to as high a level as possible.

Dimus,

I actually used spec and bumps on the GPs in my ORBX Squamish project. Runway dirt, oil and cracks all had profiles that would create height and reflected light. Those aspects of that project were, for the most part, overlooked in all of the product reviews.

The problem is that the previous engines struggled with light rendering when it came to bump/alpha and spec/alpha combinations. In many cases specular reflection would change depending on the direction of the eyepoint, which created visual distortions of specular light in intersecting ground polys. Bump alphas would complicate those anomalies.

According to LM, the new engine will render light more correctly. What I am hoping for is to be able to construct a ground poly i.e. terminal parking area with oil stains, wear, reflective markings and cracks in the PBR software, then render those textures out to an engine that is capable of interpreting the various factors like gloss, height, metalness, ambient occlusion and specular light as they were built in.

Until now, I have been able to create lovely wear features and other aspects like water puddles in older P3D versions, but have had to "bake & fake" the textures for the previous rendering engines to represent those values. I won't know until I've had some time in the new SDK and in the sim, but I have high confidence that we are heading towards that ultimate moment when we can go from something like an Unreal engine, Quixel, SD, or 3DS Vray to virtual light, ray tracing, particle physics and the rest...in the sim. Other simulator games do it...I know LM certainly has the resources to make it happen. It remains to be seen what their vision is for their platform.


IMO :encouragement:

[Priller]

Totally unrelated to the current topic, but relevant to those who will utilize PBR for aircraft texturing, and more specifically Military Aircraft. I have a real problem with artists who feel the need to "dirty up" the appearance of fighters as though by their very nature and type of role they play it will show how "used" they are.

After 26 years of working on Fighters, from the F-100 to the F-16 and many in between, there isn't a Crew Chief worth his salt that would allow his airplane to look like the ones depicted here. It makes no difference if it's here at home base or somewhere in some far flung desert base. Two things are always on their minds "Corrosion control and cleanliness". Airplanes are cleaned daily before and after sorties (wiped down, grease spots or fuel streaks eliminated. . .canopy transparencies wiped and polished intermittently). Aircraft also get a visit to the wash rack at predetermined intervals. CC's take great pride in maintaining "their airplane" and having it not only Combat ready at all times but also devoid of any corrosive sediment, oils, moisture etc.

So please consider what actual aircraft really look like when doing your repaints. Just because it's an airplane that's been in-service for 20 years, doesn't mean it's supposed to show that many layers of dirt.

I agree Falcon. And to prove what you are saying, here is a pic of a Phantom of your unit

http://www.angelfire.com/dc/jinxx1/Phantoms/F4E720135.jpg

Priller

[falcon409]

I agree Falcon. And to prove what you are saying, here is a pic of a Phantom of your unit

http://www.angelfire.com/dc/jinxx1/Phantoms/F4E720135.jpg

Priller
Yep, looks like a Hill AFB TDY probably. We Transitioned to the F-16's in 90-91'

[Crusader]

Yep, looks like a Hill AFB TDY probably. We Transitioned to the F-16's in 90-91'

Ed , that is about the same time we at the 906th TFG at Wright Patterson transitioned from the F4's to the F-16'S .

Rich

[TuFun]

Kevin Miller
3D artist and developer (ACES)

Looks like Quixel materials work well. It seems like the PBR implantation is a bit basic, and I would LOVE more control over a few more things in the shader (like normal map power), but its "serviceable". Flight Sim World's PBR shader was much better overall, but this is still leaps and bounds above what FSX had.

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/546140-playing-around-with-pbr-in-44/?_fromLogin=1

(https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/546140-playing-around-with-pbr-in-44/?_fromLogin=1)
P3Dv4.4

https://www.avsim.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://www.gibbageart.com/files/pbr_test_03.jpg&key=65bd62b166524573043944541a541b67e3c2be9fa8668b fb083185d322f7d13c

[Javis]

Probably the biggest thing will be the availability of specular and bump mapping on ground polys, but the entire process is going to become more intuitive. I haven't begun to work with the current SDK, and I think it will be a process learning how to use new features fully, but from what I have experimented with the last couple of years I would anticipate that ground polys and scenery objects will become as important as Virtual Cockpits.

Until now, developers have been limited to textures that they have created from photos, or Photoshop. Developing with PBR tools will change all of that. Suites like Quixel or Substance Painter let the developer create extremely complex and realistic textures for terrain, vegetation, structures and vehicles. For ground polys, an artist can tailor every square meter of ground to suit regional and seasonal requirements. The only limits are, of course, going to be the ability of the CPU and GPU to manage those assets, but that technology along with 64 bit platforms will improve with time.

My work has been focused in this area for at least three years, and my projects are ready for a full PBR engine....I hope. lol
As soon as I am able to install the new P3D I'll know for sure.

I'll post up a couple of screens, and make a vid for the PBR thread. I'm sure there will be a lot to talk about.

Very interesting, Gordon, thanks very much ! Yes, i'm sure these are going to be exiting times for P3D developers. "The sky is the limit" becoming more true each year. And i'm also sure we haven't seen nothing yet with the v4.4 F-16 when it comes to PBR.. ;-) I have a couple of models in the works myself so i'm going to follow everything PBR related with eagle eyes and have a go at it once i know how :wink:

Baz ( Barry, AH) says that the patch for the C-119 will include PBR textures. Not available here in Europe yet, sitting on the fence !

Thanks again, Gordon, looking forward to anything PBR related you'll come up with ! :encouragement:

cheers,
Jan

[Javis]

Totally unrelated to the current topic, but relevant to those who will utilize PBR for aircraft texturing, and more specifically Military Aircraft. I have a real problem with artists who feel the need to "dirty up" the appearance of fighters as though by their very nature and type of role they play it will show how "used" they are.

After 26 years of working on Fighters, from the F-100 to the F-16 and many in between, there isn't a Crew Chief worth his salt that would allow his airplane to look like the ones depicted here. It makes no difference if it's here at home base or somewhere in some far flung desert base. Two things are always on their minds "Corrosion control and cleanliness". Airplanes are cleaned daily before and after sorties (wiped down, grease spots or fuel streaks eliminated. . .canopy transparencies wiped and polished intermittently). Aircraft also get a visit to the wash rack at predetermined intervals. CC's take great pride in maintaining "their airplane" and having it not only Combat ready at all times but also devoid of any corrosive sediment, oils, moisture etc.

So please consider what actual aircraft really look like when doing your repaints. Just because it's an airplane that's been in-service for 20 years, doesn't mean it's supposed to show that many layers of dirt.

Drat! Here i was thinking i was getting a compliment for my screenies.... :dejection:

No worries, Ed, i'm sure you're right about sometimes too dirty jet aircraft textures in the sim. But don't forget that the screenshots here are particularly done to show the PBR effect in v4.4 and that the textures might not have been changed compared to the default ones. Could be like this F-16 in FSX or even P3Dv4.3 looks a lot less dirty.

But, hey, if you look for a RW dirty F-16 it's not like you can't find one... :

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/f16c.jpg

Obviouly hard at work in some conflict zone, no time for cleaning..

cheers,
jan

[Javis]

Kevin Miller
3D artist and developer (ACES)

Looks like Quixel materials work well. It seems like the PBR implantation is a bit basic, and I would LOVE more control over a few more things in the shader (like normal map power), but its "serviceable". Flight Sim World's PBR shader was much better overall, but this is still leaps and bounds above what FSX had.

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/546140-playing-around-with-pbr-in-44/?_fromLogin=1

(https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/546140-playing-around-with-pbr-in-44/?_fromLogin=1)
P3Dv4.4



Very interesting, Ted ! Thanks for that !

cheers,
Jan

[TuFun]

He's going to provide a tutorial for converting Spec into PBR (manually) and a Quixel workflow for P3D. Also He will do a video later with a better explanation and break down the various components of the new metalness channel and how to properly use it.

[bazzar]

Very interesting, Gordon, thanks very much ! Yes, i'm sure these are going to be exiting times for P3D developers. "The sky is the limit" becoming more true each year. And i'm also sure we haven't seen nothing yet with the v4.4 F-16 when it comes to PBR.. ;-) I have a couple of models in the works myself so i'm going to follow everything PBR related with eagle eyes and have a go at it once i know how :wink:

Baz ( Barry, AH) says that the patch for the C-119 will include PBR textures. Not available here in Europe yet, sitting on the fence !

Thanks again, Gordon, looking forward to anything PBR related you'll come up with ! :encouragement:

cheers,
Jan

Jan, the Boxcar has always had PBR-style textures produced using PBR techniques. The SP does NOT have models created for PBR. That would require the 4.4 SDK which has only just been released and the models would have to be made for PBR materials and exported with the 4.4 SDK. So whilst SPV1.1 has PBR type textures, the models are definitely NOT PBR dedicated. Just some clarification there.

On a general note, as a developer I am becoming increasingly concerned over people's expectations with regard to "PBR". A model produced with PBR materials will NOT be backwards compatible. Therefore for a product to be useable in earlier versions of the sim, and also be dedicated for V4.4, it will not simply be a matter of conversion. It is highly likely that developers will charge for P3DV4.4 dedicated add-ons - the work required cannot simply be absorbed.

P3DV4.4 uses a 'type' of PBR, not the full bells and whistles one is used to in high-end computer games and nowhere near the results you get in DCS.

Looking at the F-16 shots posted here, the effect is nice but in my opinion, so far, no more than what a well-produced specular and normal channel would give you. Have a look at our Spitfire shown here. And the sim that screenshot was taken from? FSX.

It will be interesting to see what happens with PBR-dedicated and just what emerges and when.:engel016:

[Mach3DS]

Which is the precise reason I did not upgrade the A2A stuff for P3D. Because my guess is that they are going to charge again for the v4.4 or they simply won't update them at all....which would be a silly move IMHO.

[bazzar]

It seems to me that developers are penalised by having to absorb time and costs in preparing add-ons to suit a new development in simulation. 4.4 is most certainly not a simple "upgrade" - as many are about to realise. I wonder how many people remember the debates that raged over devs charging for FSX models over FS9? Again, they were not simple upgrades, they required new models.

Existing products can be made to be compatible with 4.4 with relative ease and without too much cost. But to make a model dedicated 4.4 is an entirely different story. Software requirements are different to start with.

Frustration might be better focused toward the simulator manufacturer in an effort to get them to support developers by making it easier and more cost effective to transition to a new engine. Put an hourly rate on the learning curves required and you'll see what I mean.

[Javis]

Jan, the Boxcar has always had PBR-style textures produced using PBR techniques. The SP does NOT have models created for PBR. That would require the 4.4 SDK which has only just been released and the models would have to be made for PBR materials and exported with the 4.4 SDK. So whilst SPV1.1 has PBR type textures, the models are definitely NOT PBR dedicated. Just some clarification there.

Barry that, Roger. Ehhh.... Roger that, Barry. Sure. Tis deffinately true though that, now with the SP applied, the C-119 looks absolutely marvelous ! Thanks for that, mate ! :encouragement:

I'm only starting to comprehend what this PBR toy is all about. I seem to gather though that it's not something that will burst out of our screens but that it rather will give a delicate and subtle touch of light to the textures. As a hobbyist oil painter i can certainly appreciate that. Nothing more rewarding than to put delicate glints of light on certain objects which will 'bring them to life'. I.e. icing on the cake if you will.


On a general note, as a developer I am becoming increasingly concerned over people's expectations with regard to "PBR". A model produced with PBR materials will NOT be backwards compatible. Therefore for a product to be useable in earlier versions of the sim, and also be dedicated for V4.4, it will not simply be a matter of conversion. It is highly likely that developers will charge for P3DV4.4 dedicated add-ons - the work required cannot simply be absorbed.


Well, we've been practising a lot in this respect, haven't we. ;-) Atleast ever since the original MSFS got company... Not sure how much of the same aircraft models i had to buy again to keep up ( and expensive ones too, like PMDG... ) I also think that simmers who are still with FS9 or FSX (or even earlier...) don't care much about PBR inflicted aircraft models. Personally i have always loved to look forward to something relatively new in my fav flightsim.


P3DV4.4 uses a 'type' of PBR, not the full bells and whistles one is used to in high-end computer games and nowhere near the results you get in DCS.
Looking at the F-16 shots posted here, the effect is nice but in my opinion, so far, no more than what a well-produced specular and normal channel would give you. Have a look at our Spitfire shown here. And the sim that screenshot was taken from? FSX.

Sure looks the part, Barry !

But the F-16 in v4.4, this is what LM says about it : F-16 aircraft fully updated to PBR for both the interior and exterior models.

Would that really mean that the model itself is updated or is it really only the textures that are updated ??.... ( i mean, what do *we* know..... ;-) I.e. if the model is indeed 'PBR updated' as such, not only the textures, the effect really is a bit miniscule, isn't it....

It will be interesting to see what happens with PBR-dedicated and just what emerges and when.:engel016:

Absolutely !

In ending here's a 'juxtaposition' of the 'PBR F-16' and two other 'non PBR' models of just about the same stature. I certainly do think that, compared to the other two, the F-16 has a certain 'je ne sais quoi' about it....

http://sectionf8.com/f86files/P3Dv4/pbrenzo1.jpg

Cheers,
Jan

[SkippyBing]

Would that really mean that the model itself is updated or is it really only the textures that are updated ??

The model is updated to indicate to the sim that it has PBR textures applied.
You also have to set up the PBR materials, ie telling 3d studio which files to use for the albedo, normal, and PBR maps. When you think about how many textures are in the average model that's a lot of work, without taking into account making the new maps themselves (albedo and normal should be reusable I think).

[Dino Cattaneo]

...boy that F-35 looks cool even without PBR! ;-)

Anyway, thing is that PBR is not a spell that will magically make your model awesome. The artist ability will play a big role and, in many lighting conditions (e.g. normal daylight), there will not be a huge difference between PBR and non-PBR models. Where PBR should look definitely better is in cases such as dawn/sunset lights, multiple light sources and/or extreme angles.

That being said, I really dig v4.4: on my system photoreal textures look sharper, SpeedTree is finally useable (it had a huge hit to my fps before) and VR usability has done a big step forward.

[gman5250]

I've finally been able to download V4.4. When it snows here we go to smoke signal speed, so I had to download in chunks...took three days, but V4.4 is installed and all the bits are updated and working as expected. That said, one or two observations.

From the end user standpoint:
Yay...the new sim is installed, things look great...which models are PBR? Are all of the models PBR, and if not...why not? I'm totally confused as to which developer will upgrade to PBR, how long will it take and what will it cost me?

From the Developer standpoint:
Yay...PBR is here...more or less...kind of...but not entirely...WTF do I do now?
Step one, study the new SDK...again...hours and hours of head scratching and pondering as to exactly how the alchemy is going to help me achieve my goals.
Step two, look at my existing inventory and calculate how long it will take to convert all of those models to PBR.
Step three, try to explain to my customer the intricacies of the process and why I can't swallow those costs every time we get an incremental build that requires massive re-tooling at the developer level.

I have had a product line of four airport sceneries, two aircraft, a large vegetation and autogen library ready to market...for three years. I have been watching other developers endure massive costs to keep their inventory current, some absorbing the cost and some making decisions that incur the wrath of the consumers. As a result, I've taken the position that I will not release my scenery or aircraft until we reach a plateau where I am not required to spend all of my time modifying hundreds of scenery models to accommodate the most current builds.

At the moment, I'm evaluating the new SDK and my current inventory which has been largely converted to PBR. For the most part things look fantastic, but now there is room to enhance those models...again...to reflect current state-of-the-art PBR rendering in V4.4. Of course, this is not a plateau but another step in a process that may lead to full PBR integration and eventually...drum roll...ray tracing.

I'm lucky, because I don't need to keep anyone happy, except my wife who has followed the process for nearly six years now.

I'm wondering...would it be beneficial for someone like myself to do a video that illustrates the process of actually setting up a mesh for PBR production and illustrate how different it is from previous methods? The consumer has very little understanding of exactly what is required to convert an existing model, the costs involved and why developers cannot simply flip a magic switch to convert. A video that outlines the complexity of the process may be of educational value...or maybe not. lol

This whole conversation around PBR is going to become a focus, and demarcation point for flight sim development moving forward. At some point the hard reality that cross compatibility is simply unrealistic. It's going to be like moving into an entirely new sim. I've recently installed DCS World, and while I love the benefits of the platform, I realize that I much prefer the ability to build an IFR or VFR flight plan in a tube or old radial and just fly anywhere and any way I please. If that becomes available in Prepar3D, in full 64bit PBR integrated, ray tracing glorious techno bliss, I'll be quite satisfied.

Thoughts appreciated.

BTW Dino...that F-35 does look absolutely fantastic!

[Daube]

I can only speak from the customer point of view, but I think I understand your developper point of view when it comes to costs.
The new PBR effect require the developpers to invest in new tools (if they didn't already have them) like Quixel and others I don't know...
There is also the great investment in time.
Instead of wasting time and energy to convert previous models to PBR, I would suggest focusing on producing new, fully sale-able (I mean, at full regular price) products with PBR included.

The time it would take to make a "decent" conversion of an existing model to PBR would be problematic for a free update.
And I'm really not sure (polite way to say "I'm sure it's not possible") that it would be possible to charge a moderate fee just for a PBR update. Not enough customer would want to spend money for that, especially if the model already looks good as is.

[lagaffe]

To answer to Gman, if my memory is good one aircraft is with PBR texture: the F-16, and perhaps the AC-16. For that you must install Contents package.

I begin to study PBR last year during the summer. Last Gman's posts (2017 - 2018) about PBR subject were very interesting and so I try Quixel and Subtance Painter demos.
For personnal convenience, I choose SP and bought a licence during 2017 Black Friday.
Actually some textures of my Menestrel HN 700 wer created with Substance Painter and I think to transform my actual works in PBR textures to see all process needed.
I am also woorking on a scenery about CYMX-Mirabel (Quebec) and I think translate actual textures in PBR ones to see the results (runways, walls, etc).

I will try during theses researchs to share my "knowledge" if you want.

[TuFun]

Kevin Miller
3D artist and developer (ACES)

He's been testing PBR in P3Dv4.4 and his thoughts...

Quixel is cheap, relitivly simple, and can get good results fast. Substance is more expensive, MUCH more complex, and can get better results in a longer time. Also Substance has more industry support. If you have the time to learn Substance, you can get better results, but it will take longer.

Well just finished the next test. This was done to mainly show you the key feature of the Metalness in PBR (for those who dont know). Its one of the marquee features in PBR that sim artist's should take advantage of, and thats the Metalness channel. While playing around with this feature, I found something interesting out. The Prepar3DPBR shader in Max actually gives you a decent preview of PBR in Max! This is really HUGE as much of our time is burned loading up P3D to check out the changes. With this, we can get a general idea of what it looks like in Max before loading the Sim engine! This is massive! THANK YOU LM!!

https://www.avsim.com/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://www.gibbageart.com/files/pbr_test_02.jpg&key=ab7b340cabc6be2f7e5062e1a88a8e58d16c6fc4e16d2d 73c9a6152d3859e90f

On the left, a materials test in-sim. On the right, the same test in Max. To the naked eye, they look VASTLY different, but they key change is the reflection. The old "specular" shader ALWAYS had a crisp/sharp reflection. You could change the level of reflection, but not how soft/sharp it was, making metals that are not chrome almost impossible. Many of us would bake in reflections to get around this limitation. Now in PBR, we can control the reflections a lot better.
For example, the middle sphere in the lowest row looks like an anodized aluminum. This effect was IMPOSSIBLE in the past.

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/546140-playing-around-with-pbr-in-44/?do=findComment&comment=3935409

What will P3Dv.5 bring to the table?

(https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/546140-playing-around-with-pbr-in-44/?do=findComment&comment=3935409)

[Sundog]

Hi GMan,

I agree with Daube. Product completed, is product completed. Make new product PBR. If people want old product to PBR, than an upgrade purchase will be required.

Having said, your tutorials go a long way towards really explaining to people that (A picture is worth a thousand words), why the cost of the upgrade. It isn't like you're just copying one of the texture layers and making minor changes.

That's just my .02c.

Ken

[TuFun]

My concern is 6 months later or longer P3Dv.5 is released and changes are made again that require updated models. I have a feeling v.5 will show up next year.

[bazzar]

I wonder. I would think the income to LH from all of this probably pays their coffee bill. So long as they have a stable platform for professional flight training and running scenarios, that's all they need. They don't need to be in the leisure market.

[Mach3DS]

I've finally been able to download V4.4. When it snows here we go to smoke signal speed, so I had to download in chunks...took three days, but V4.4 is installed and all the bits are updated and working as expected. That said, one or two observations.

From the end user standpoint:
Yay...the new sim is installed, things look great...which models are PBR? Are all of the models PBR, and if not...why not? I'm totally confused as to which developer will upgrade to PBR, how long will it take and what will it cost me?

From the Developer standpoint:
Yay...PBR is here...more or less...kind of...but not entirely...WTF do I do now?
Step one, study the new SDK...again...hours and hours of head scratching and pondering as to exactly how the alchemy is going to help me achieve my goals.
Step two, look at my existing inventory and calculate how long it will take to convert all of those models to PBR.
Step three, try to explain to my customer the intricacies of the process and why I can't swallow those costs every time we get an incremental build that requires massive re-tooling at the developer level.

I have had a product line of four airport sceneries, two aircraft, a large vegetation and autogen library ready to market...for three years. I have been watching other developers endure massive costs to keep their inventory current, some absorbing the cost and some making decisions that incur the wrath of the consumers. As a result, I've taken the position that I will not release my scenery or aircraft until we reach a plateau where I am not required to spend all of my time modifying hundreds of scenery models to accommodate the most current builds.

At the moment, I'm evaluating the new SDK and my current inventory which has been largely converted to PBR. For the most part things look fantastic, but now there is room to enhance those models...again...to reflect current state-of-the-art PBR rendering in V4.4. Of course, this is not a plateau but another step in a process that may lead to full PBR integration and eventually...drum roll...ray tracing.

I'm lucky, because I don't need to keep anyone happy, except my wife who has followed the process for nearly six years now.

I'm wondering...would it be beneficial for someone like myself to do a video that illustrates the process of actually setting up a mesh for PBR production and illustrate how different it is from previous methods? The consumer has very little understanding of exactly what is required to convert an existing model, the costs involved and why developers cannot simply flip a magic switch to convert. A video that outlines the complexity of the process may be of educational value...or maybe not. lol

This whole conversation around PBR is going to become a focus, and demarcation point for flight sim development moving forward. At some point the hard reality that cross compatibility is simply unrealistic. It's going to be like moving into an entirely new sim. I've recently installed DCS World, and while I love the benefits of the platform, I realize that I much prefer the ability to build an IFR or VFR flight plan in a tube or old radial and just fly anywhere and any way I please. If that becomes available in Prepar3D, in full 64bit PBR integrated, ray tracing glorious techno bliss, I'll be quite satisfied.

Thoughts appreciated.

BTW Dino...that F-35 does look absolutely fantastic!

I think I emailed you 1.5 years ago Gordon, and I remember I asked you about PBR. We had a good conversation. Take it with some context, Gordon has been looking ahead for a long time. When I first started into DCS painting with PBR structure I didn't know who else to turn to. I don't think at the time Gordon had solid answers either. It was known, but within the the Flight sim community it was not really known or at least used (at least among the painters). Perhaps bigger developers have been using it for a while; but if so, then why all the headache (if you've already been using it for years shouldn't you have those renditions in your files)? At any rate, this is a landmark update. It will pave the way for a competely New Rendering engine that is coming - Likely in v5 - (at least according to LM in an interview a few months back, v5 would be a good block point to introduce something like this) in which PBR would be standard gfx benchmark. Not sure what this is going to do to the community, but it really is a stepping off point. Away from the old and into the future. My own perspective is that FSX will now officially go the way of FS9. Used but no longer supported. I think the work flow is such that being able to develop a product for both P3D3/FSX & v4.4+ will become too time and resource consuming for most devs. Plus, as someone who is painting in it, it is far easier to use with far better results for the time invested for me to go back to FSX paint kits. I'm officially out of FSX/P3D3. It's a hard move. Because I've invested a lot of money into it. I'm not saying others should do the same. But I'm at a point in my hobby that I'm able to make this cold turkey move. Not for everyone, I get it.

Working on a Fictional "Have Glass" Hornet.... I"ve done this for a few aircraft now. I really like this paint job IRL. Obviously. LOL.

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4862/45282566695_7dc3324a74_o.jpg


https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4858/45282566645_8c7bdacc76_o.jpg

[gman5250]

Update:

I've updated P3D to V4.4 with no issues.

I've installed all of my scenery packages (and other 3rd party), installed the new SDK, updated 3DStudio Max 2015 to utilize the SDK and built a few PBR ground poly textures. My existing "fake and bake" textures work fine in 4.4, but I want to move into the supported PBR framework built in to the SDK.

I understand that Arno is working on updating MCX to work with the new PBR materials, so I anticipate being able to place ground polys with PBR texturing...as soon as MCX is updated.

Once I get a working set of ground poly textures in either KBIH Eastern Sierra Regional or KRNO Reno/Tahoe International, I'll shoot some screen caps and a video to show the process and functioning PBR ground polys and airplane.

I don't see any problem with using Quixel or Substance Painter materials for current P3D PBR support, but this build is a fundamental PBR framework...not the full pop deal. It is a good start, and does offer a user friendly interface to get those lovely bumps and specular sheets working on ground polys. Buildings, GSE and other 3D models are fundamentally the same approach as a PBR airplane.

The SDK does explain, in a not too painful way, how to place the various bits like ambient occlusion in their corresponding color channels, which is going to be a diversion for folks who have been skinning in previous platforms, but the logic is really basic and easily understood. IMO...it's a major step in the right direction, but as has been stated above there will be many conversations in the community as to where things are going next.


I agree that LM may or may not be interested in a state-of-the-art "entertainment" simulator, but at the same time if they are serious about drones...they need a talent pool to draw from. A tricked out simulator would be a great "recruiter".


:pirate:

[Dino Cattaneo]

PBR tests from a sleepless night (...just the fuselage, disregard the canopy glass)... looks much better in motion.

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65417&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65418&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65419&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65420&stc=1

[Javis]

Well done,Dino ! Yeah, your F-35 certainly looks cool, with or without PBR ! ;-)

Did you use Quicksel or SP or something else maybe ?

What can be noticed on the 'PBR F-16' f.i. are the sunglints on the front edges of the vertical stab and in a less significant way on the horizontal surfaces' edges (under certain view conditions of course). Will be interesting to see on your F-35 where the vertical stabs are placed at an angle, not vertical.

[Dino Cattaneo]

...no Quixel, nor Substance - I have just defined the metallic proprieties in a new map (hand made) and used the existing diffuse (as albedo) and normal maps.
You do not necessarily need to use an external program to paint in PBR. PBR is just a different mathematical model for the light behavior, which requires new maps. Quixel, Substance and similar applications make your life easier as they will prepare the maps with the right settings for you...but they are not strictly mandatory. That being said, I am leaning towards the purchase of Substance Painter.

[Dino Cattaneo]

A couple of notes just in case other developers are experimenting with PBR:

- A quick and dirty way to see some PBR effects in your model is to copy-past the _metallic texture of the F-16 and use it as you metallic texture, with shininess linked to its alpha. Of course this is not optimal BUT it is OK as first glance if your aircraft is a weathered, non-glossy one. Should be a nice start for most military models.

- The ALBEDO in the material definition will have some impact on your albedo texture. Leave it to 1.00 if you want to use the true color of your albedo texture (which is in 99.9% of the cases I guess)

- You CANNOT reuse the same texture in the same model for both pbr and non-pbr materials in the same model (inlcuding its VC). If you do so, its brightness will be screwed up in during rendering. I had the fuselage material of the F-35 converted to .PBR in the external model, while the VC uses a non-pbr material. As result the VC instance looked very dark. I also had issues with coexisting PBR and non-PBR materials using the same texture... one or both had their brightness screwed up.
This is why, I guess, the F-16 has duplicate diffuse and albedo textures (while they are basically the same file).

[Mach3DS]

Yup, in a nut shell, the Albedo is the old Diffuse map. Only now the color RGB brightness has a direct effect on the final property of the material. Also, the shadows need to be eliminated. The albedo should be the texture colors only. No shadows should be baked in (for best results).

Although the P3D is used slightly differently from the DCS version the channels are swapped around but they still perform the same functions.

Here's a few different variants of paint versus metal which I think will be able to be accomplished equally well now in P3Dv4.4+

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1884/43865811475_8b349c7fef_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4826/44245497420_3ff5526f20_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1869/44407364482_ccc830c839_o.png

https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/974/27312471627_3baeba70a5_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4706/25640266457_242e3227a2_o.jpg

[bazzar]

The Phoenix is our first "dedicated" model for V4.4 with full PBR materials and textures. Here are some pics of the exterior...http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65472&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65473&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65474&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65475&stc=1

[Mach3DS]

Very nice!

[bazzar]

and here are some previews, less people, of the interior VC. We are getting good results in dynamic reflections but are still at work on finessing glasswork.

Whilst the advantages are pretty clear for exteriors, we have yet to be convinced on VCs. Whether the engine can render the textures with enough subtlety, remains to be seen...

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65476&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65477&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65478&stc=1http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65479&stc=1

[gman5250]

and here are some previews, less people, of the interior VC. We are getting good results in dynamic reflections but are still at work on finessing glasswork.

Whilst the advantages are pretty clear for exteriors, we have yet to be convinced on VCs. Whether the engine can render the textures with enough subtlety, remains to be seen...

Baz...those are really some brilliant shots. Beautiful work sir. :very_drunk:

I did a set of PBR textures for my F7F VC...specifically the panel. I posted those up in another thread here. When I took them into the sim, I realized that I actually liked my original baked non-PBR set better. I think it is going to take a while for devs to migrate into the process and get a sense of what is best for a project.

That said...the sim is turning into a very fine environment to explore.

[TuFun]

Curious if anyone has seen these updates to the sound system? Saw this over at Avsim.

"LM have made some significant changes to sound support that is now available to developers/content providers. It is LMs hope, 3rd party embrace and use those new features as they are no longer bound to some of the older sound limitations and/or work-arounds."

Cheers, Rob.

[blanston12]

Curious if anyone has seen these updates to the sound system? Saw this over at Avsim.

"LM have made some significant changes to sound support that is now available to developers/content providers. It is LMs hope, 3rd party embrace and use those new features as they are no longer bound to some of the older sound limitations and/or work-arounds."

Cheers, Rob.

I have not noticed anything, I assume its a lot like the PBR, it will be significant when developers take advantage of it but right now users won't notice much.

[TuFun]

I was reading this comment about the sound issues and possible fix if one has sound issues in P3Dv4.4
Also a video showing P3Dv4.4 PBR texture primer.

https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=131659&start=15#p190450

(https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=131659&start=15#p190450)
Fix...
https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=131659&start=15#p190455

(https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=131659&start=15#p190455)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPM1Xtcsf7o&feature=youtu.be





(https://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=131659&start=15#p190455)

[Javis]

...no Quixel, nor Substance - ....

Grazie mille, Dino ! Valuable info for any PBR dilettante :cool:

And thanks, Rick ! Those DCS models look fantastic but i suppose it will never be my fav flightsim (in fact i only bought it for the F-86...;-)

[Javis]

The Phoenix is our first "dedicated" model for V4.4 with full PBR materials and textures. Here are some pics of the exterior...

and here are some previews, less people, of the interior VC. We are getting good results in dynamic reflections but are still at work on finessing glasswork.



Absolutely first class, Baz ! :applause:

[Javis]

Curious if anyone has seen these updates to the sound system? Saw this over at Avsim......

I was reading this comment about the sound issues and possible fix if one has sound issues in P3Dv4.4
Also a video showing P3Dv4.4 PBR texture primer.


Thanks Ted !

I don't think i hear anything noteworthy new re engine sounds inside or out in v4.4. I also don't seem to have any problem with sounds all together in v4.4. The C-47 Pratt & Whitney concert for two R-1830-S1C3G Twin Wasp 1200hp 14 cylinder air-cooled two row radial piston engines still sounds as gorgeous as you have created it many moons ago, inside and out ! :biggrin-new:

Nope, for the time being i have no issues with sound in v4.4.

And thanks for the PBR video ! :encouragement:

[gman5250]

Thanks TF...I used the fix for the sound and it solved the "spooling up" anomaly. Sound is correct when switching P3D cameras, and ChasePlane cameras. Good tip. :encouragement::encouragement:

Update:
I'm successfully exporting scenery and aircraft models into V4.4 from the SDK. PBR textures are functioning on aircraft and ground models, but not yet on ground polys. Right now I'm working with the new texture format using Quixel and non Quixel textures. Once I have anything the comes remotely close to the above posted models, I'll share those. :running:

Thx to Dino for his contributions and TF for that great video.
Baz, those pics of the Phoenix are downright inspiring.
Rick...your work shows how far you have come in a year and a half. Kudos sir!!
This is a steep learning curve and all input is extremely helpful and appreciated.

[Javis]

Update:
I'm successfully exporting scenery and aircraft models into V4.4 from the SDK. PBR textures are functioning on aircraft and ground models, but not yet on ground polys. Right now I'm working with the new texture format using Quixel and non Quixel textures. Once I have anything the comes remotely close to the above posted models, I'll share those.

Thanks Gordon, look forward to it !

Say, i just paged thru that Substance site ( https://www.allegorithmic.com/substance ) My gawd...... Did you see that ?....


This is a steep learning curve and all input is extremely helpful and appreciated.

+1 ! :encouragement:

[gman5250]

Thanks Gordon, look forward to it !

Say, i just paged thru that Substance site ( https://www.allegorithmic.com/substance ) My gawd...... Did you see that ?

I sure did. Spent a lot of time there and on Unigene and others. Bottom line is that we have tools to take us anywhere we want to go. The only question is going to be how far LM wishes to take P3D.

I'm leaning towards Substance Painter for my production work. I think Quixel is a fine, affordable interface that is very user friendly and perfectly suited for skinners and devs who are looking for a point and click approach. SP is going to be a more comprehensive and flexible tool in my view, so that will be on my priorities list.

BTW...I re-constructed the 3DS Max PBR Tutorial that Ted posted. It's really handy as a tool to determine what values are needed to produce different PBR reflective levels. The process of actually building the model and materials was a great way to get a hands on feel for the new workflow. :encouragement:


https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4859/46288800911_e95866b63f_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4891/46288805331_3057368278_o.jpg

[lagaffe]

Happy to know that you choses also SP for your workflow, I feel less alone with my choices, not that I don't like PSP but SP seems more flexible and consumes less memory.:santahat:

[TuFun]

Thanks Ted !

I don't think i hear anything noteworthy new re engine sounds inside or out in v4.4. I also don't seem to have any problem with sounds all together in v4.4. The C-47 Pratt & Whitney concert for two R-1830-S1C3G Twin Wasp 1200hp 14 cylinder air-cooled two row radial piston engines still sounds as gorgeous as you have created it many moons ago, inside and out ! :biggrin-new:

Nope, for the time being i have no issues with sound in v4.4.

And thanks for the PBR video ! :encouragement:

Just curious what LM was talking about changes to the sound system. Rob has built a monter PC, but mention he's testing P3V.5 on his old system.

I almost have all the parts to my system build just waiting on SAMSUNG 970 EVO M.2 SSD to arrive. Will be ready for P3V.5!
In the mean time I can get back on the C-47 for FSXSE.

Leak test video, but you see its massive cooling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Q6W-OSThNc

https://www.avsim.com/files/forum/monthly_11_2018/thumbnail_IMG_6867.thumb.jpg.07f5450e83022973d4679 12e6c0b59f5.jpg

[roger-wilco-66]

What a rig ! ! !


Cheers,
Mark

[Dino Cattaneo]

Has anyone found a good PBR recipe for the canopy glass?

[gman5250]

Has anyone found a good PBR recipe for the canopy glass?

I'm working through my setups for metals, dull and shiny, painted surfaces, glass/canopy and various surfaces like asphalt, concrete and organics.
Glass and transparent plastics are at the top of my to do list. I'll post up as I work out the settings.

[bazzar]

I guess you need to ask yourself why you need PBR for glass. We are getting dynamics and a good reflectivity/colour by using "FSX"style materials. Unless you are going to have a canopy with deep gouging in it or something, I see little point. The normal mapping for glass in PBR can produce a very unrealistic "orange-peel" effect that I certainly don't like. I stand to be corrected but I don't think LM use PBR for the glass on the F-16. Probably for similar reasons.:engel016:

[Sundog]

I guess you need to ask yourself why you need PBR for glass. We are getting dynamics and a good reflectivity/colour by using "FSX"style materials. Unless you are going to have a canopy with deep gouging in it or something, I see little point. The normal mapping for glass in PBR can produce a very unrealistic "orange-peel" effect that I certainly don't like. I stand to be corrected but I don't think LM use PBR for the glass on the F-16. Probably for similar reasons.:engel016:

The only thing I can think of is he wants to simulate the metal glint of the actual gold material in the F-35. All U.S. stealth planes, F-35, B-2, and the F-22 have an actual layer of gold in the canopy/windscreen to shield the cockpit from radar.

[bazzar]

Understood but that can be done via traditional materials with manipulation of the spec layer. I really do not think that PBR will give the right results as it makes use of the normal channel and it is very hard to get that subtle enough. Time experimenting will see.:engel016:

[Dino Cattaneo]

Well,

thing is that PBR material seem to have a slightly different reflections at certain angles (e.g. sky and ground reflections look a little different and arguably more realistic than on non-pbr materials)... so my current glass settings look a little "odd" - but just a little. Very very little to be honest. Currently the models with PBR fuselage and non-PBR glass look OK - I was just wondering if they could be better. It may well turn out that "traditional" materials do a better job for the glass: as usual, the important thing is the result.

[bazzar]

Absolutely Dino, trial and error is really the only way forward. :engel016:

[gman5250]

Another thing that I am interested in is the interior reflections on the canopy material. I'm having good results with the interior canopy reflecting ground polys, runway lines etc. using the traditional setup. I'm curious to see how those reflections will work with a PBR setup.

For me the entire process will be an ongoing exploration of what tools may be needed as the platform develops.

FYI:
I'm sure you gentlemen check, but Arno has just updated MCX for V4.4. It's on the Development Releases page. I noted that it looks for V4.4, but I triple checked all of my addresses to make sure everything was directed to the correct file.

Below:
I ran across this. The GP is similar to what can be constructed in Quixel or Substance Painter. The same reflective values seen in the water could also be modified for grimy or worn canopy material. This would be especially effective with enhanced rain effects i.e. TrueGlass or future LM iterations of rain effects in V5.

Of course, these PBR effects are also going to radically improve what we can offer in GP. I am currently experimenting with terrain textures for grass/brush in areas between runways or on the periphery of airport taxiways etc. So far they are working extremely well with my vegetation and volumetric grasses.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEzKnwHOi8I

[Mach3DS]

Gordon, that video is incredible. If this is what is in store, you've sumited that PBR mountain!

[Mach3DS]

As for the question regarding why new glass materials? v5 will likely bring a completely new graphics engine. PBR based but not backwards compatible. LM has already hinted at this in many interviews this year. Adam Breed said it him self that v5 would be a block point that is appropriate to introduce something completely new. So it's kind of a do it now or do it later....my thought is, if you're doing everything else other than glass....why not just do it al? Then you don't have to do it again! Unless you're like me and are never satisfied...then you do things over and over....LOL

[gman5250]

Gordon, that video is incredible. If this is what is in store, you've sumited that PBR mountain!

The video is from the Fly Tampa team, but I am definitely working on similar. Arno just released the new MCX with V4.4 compatibility, so today I'm able to place ground polys using the tool. At the moment I am updating KBIH Eastern Sierra Regional...my testbed.

I'm just hoping I am anticipating the V.5 engine correctly and won't need to go back and re-invent all my stuff...….again. lol :beaten:

[Dimus]

Well that sure looks inspiring Gordon! I have lots of homework to do.

[Dino Cattaneo]

Like for like comparison...

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=65709&stc=1

[Daube]

Very nice comparison.
The one on the right looks like an excellent model for a sim.
The other one, on the left, looks like a real world picture.

[Mach3DS]

Oh man....PBR is such a refreshing and needed aspect in P3D. I'm so excited about these developers who are jumping in. Great work.

[gary20]

I agree it's refreshing and well worth the learning curve.


The SDK indicated that emmisive maps (nightime textures) need a lua script:
"Emissive Map= Map that defines areas of the textured material that will illuminate. Intensity of the illumination can be adjusted through scripting."
I've been experimenting with different metallic and albedo textures and modified the F-16C scripts for emmisive maps that work on lights being toggled to emmisive maps that show up at night.
I've included it below if it's of any use to anyone. I dont know if the lua syntax is correct, but it's working.
The emmisive scale needs to be adjusted from 0.0 t0 1.0 to suit your texture and model and it is added in the normal manner.


<-------------------------------------------------------------->
!lua
if varget("E:TIME OF DAY", "enum") == 3 then
varset("T:EmissiveTexture", "string", "Wings_LM.dds")
varset("T:EmissiveScale", "number", 0.03)
else
varset("T:EmissiveTexture", "string", "")
end
<-------------------------------------------------------------->


Where I am struggling is with glass, especially cockpit glass.
I'm wondering if a lua script might also be a way to go.


Dino's glass on his PBR model shown above looks to have preety good cockpit glass.
Could you share your recipe Dino?


Best wishes

[TuFun]

That does look realistic! RTX would be next but I hope it's not a big hit in P3D. If LM does will defiantly get a second generation RTX card. Games look fantastic with RTX.

[gman5250]

I ran across this. Wow....

As I'm working through the learning/understanding curve, it is becoming clear that we are moving to another level entirely.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPHlQz4zsFg

[TuFun]

More PBR goodness...


https://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/juxtapose/latest/embed/index.html?uid=8f28f3f4-0164-11e9-9dba-0edaf8f81e27

https://fselite.net/previews/gsx-level-2-pbr-teaser/

[Javis]

And more here ( don't forget to click the screenies) :

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/547097-pbr-3-letters-that-changed-your-livery-painters-world/

[TuFun]

More PBR on the Maddog X...

https://www.flythemaddog.com/forum/index.php?/topic/10608-fly-the-maddog-x-development-update/

[Mach3DS]

I can't wait to redo the Milviz F-100 in PBR.....I've already got the whole conversion process laid out in my mind. So hopefully it will be a clean conversion with great results....whenever MV converts (If they do).

[gman5250]

Moving through the learning curve.

I used the 3D test model to set up a texture target map that I can refer to when I build different metal types. This model is based on a 50% gray albedo and a pure white to pure black metallic target. After exporting the model I used MCX to add environment reflections and Fresnel to the .mdl, and place the model in V4.4

I can view the model in real time, motion, weather and lighting, then pick the shade of albedo color I want.
In the case of an aluminum, I can build the metal texture in Quixel Mixer or Substance Painter, then translate that texture to meet the gray value required for proper reflectivity and gloss.

After building the model I have a very comfortable understanding of the work flow, which I can translate to metal or painted aircraft, buildings, glass, ground polys and vegetation. Pretty trick.:applause:

For these screens I enabled Dynamic Reflections and Lighting. HDR enabled. Note the terrain and runway reflections. With weather enabled the clouds, shadows and lighting reflect in real time across the spheres as the clouds move across the sky.

To really appreciate the PBR material it should be viewed in motion. I'll put up a short video in the next day or two. In the meantime...


https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4839/45458480315_a9e852913d_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4859/44554142180_8b8459bc52_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4850/45648107014_d2a4438664_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4856/45648108984_bd5200cb47_o.jpg

[ejoiner]

I can't wait to redo the Milviz F-100 in PBR.....I've already got the whole conversion process laid out in my mind. So hopefully it will be a clean conversion with great results....whenever MV converts (If they do).

That one and Jankees P-51s and the Milviz F-86... :)

[gman5250]

Link to PBR materials in motion video.


https://www.brighteon.com/5981794166001

Just a quick no frills video of the PBR spheres in motion.

The texture is 50% gray with a grunge layer. PBR metalness & smoothness are 100% white to 100% black, corresponding from full shine to full dull. No Fresnel ramp or specular.
The textures were generated in Quixel Mixer.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4817/31449331197_be0143b1b5_o.jpg

[Mach3DS]

So the reflection is of actual environment....can it Self reflect? Do we know this yet Gordon? Something I didn't read yet...

Great video.

Gordon, the RGB brightness of the material color affects the look, so an aircraft aluminum might need to be in the 66% brightness range for a "real" look?

[jeansy]

Rick i will send you a message in the next day or 2 via FB in ref to your dcs paints and pbr

[gman5250]

So the reflection is of actual environment....can it Self reflect? Do we know this yet Gordon? Something I didn't read yet...

Great video.

Gordon, the RGB brightness of the material color affects the look, so an aircraft aluminum might need to be in the 66% brightness range for a "real" look?

No reflection of aircraft yet Rick, but all sim objects, terrain and weather are live. Haven't checked avatars yet.

You are right about the aluminum...somewhere around 60-66% on the R and A layers. I'm working with the B-26K right now and started at 15% metalness. That's good for the R channel on a painted plane, but the A smoothness layer is about 5-8%, or nearly black as seen here. Pure black is too flat.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4811/45670440574_a0fcfc1801_o.jpg

[Mach3DS]

Rick i will send you a message in the next day or 2 via FB in ref to your dcs paints and pbr

Copy that Matt.

@Gordon,

Looks like you're well into it! I'm going to get Quixel here soon. Will need your help again amigo!

[gman5250]

Copy that Matt.

@Gordon,

Looks like you're well into it! I'm going to get Quixel here soon. Will need your help again amigo!

Have a look at Substance Painter too Rick. For work at your level it might be worthwhile to have both, Quixel for convenient interface and SP for the high end details.
As far as help...of course, whatever you need. :encouragement:

[roger-wilco-66]

No reflection of aircraft yet Rick, but all sim objects, terrain and weather are live. Haven't checked avatars yet.

You are right about the aluminum...somewhere around 60-66% on the R and A layers. I'm working with the B-26K right now and started at 15% metalness. That's good for the R channel on a painted plane, but the A smoothness layer is about 5-8%, or nearly black as seen here. Pure black is too flat.

[..]



Gordon, since I made the textures for the A-26JK weapons in Quixel. I could make a second set of them, plugging the Quixel maps back into the models.

Cheers,
Mark

[gman5250]

Gordon, since I made the textures for the A-26JK weapons in Quixel. I could make a second set of them, plugging the Quixel maps back into the models.

Cheers,
Mark

That would be fantastic Mark! TY sir. :very_drunk:

[gman5250]

Some preliminary shots of the B-26K in PBR basic polished metal skin.

This particular work is still very much at light study level. Acquiring a sense of the new medium will come naturally to most skinners. I can see how devs can build a PK that will do most of the heavy lifting, allowing the skinner to focus on the color work, leaving the metallic layers to develop the light.
No specular layering (yet), just straight polished metal with average wear and tear. I can see where we are going once we get to full PBR...hopefully V5???

In motion this is a quantum step forward. The presence and realism are, to say the least, striking.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4845/46351191322_af9398d698_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4881/46351192832_1463ac6654_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4811/46351192212_37dd50734d_o.jpg

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4819/46351193332_a506d22798_o.jpg

[Mach3DS]

Finally got v4.4 installed. Taking a look through the SDK and then the files of the F16, the specular is still there? odd.....I thought that the Metallic file would have incorporated the Specularity? This is a deviation from how it's done in War thunder and DCS.

Gordon, shots look great! I just need a model that is PBR enabled to work on! LOL.

[Mach3DS]

I think I've got some channels inverted, but MCX now support PBR. Converted the XF92 and just messing around for the first time...

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4858/32531223008_1eac7ce3da_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4839/32531223088_bd706e9726_o.jpg

[Mach3DS]

I think I know what happened here....sleep traded for trying out the new toy, and not reloading the sim for proper texture reload. I think it was using a cached texture...looking forward to experimenting more when I get home.

Edit, just realized that I also didn't have dynamic Reflections on.....too excited, and I broke the whole thing! LOL :dizzy:

You can see that I have the incorrect spec loaded too.....wow, terrible first post! haha.... However, I think I'm understanding how it's working now in this sim vs. the other sims out there that I've painted for.

[Mach3DS]

actually....now that I'm reading through the SDK, for modeling side....I may have screwed up the conversion in MCX....I think I needed to set the Smoothness, and also need to alter the occlusion levels in the G channel....however my painted areas are super nice looking with the reflected sun...so My guess is that it was done right....more experimenting to do. Once it's dialed in, I'll be less scatter brained!

Also, only the Fuselage and wings have PBR materials applied....the vertical stab and all other parts do not.

[ejoiner]

Its all very pretty. However what sort of FPS killer are we introducing here? Just wondering. I for instance, have an older PC (i7-4770K 3.5 Ghz) and an GTX 1070 video card. How much impact will PBR have? In my settings I do not use dynamic reflections at all.

[bazzar]

Why not get the updated C-119 and then you can download the free Phoenix which is available in PBR and non-PBR for the same sim. Then you could compare the rates. We are not seeing much difference in rates on testing the Heinkel in full PBR with dynamics running fine. Incidentally, your rig is actually better than our test rig.:engel016:

[Mach3DS]

PBR shouldn't have a perceivable impact. It's just a different way of rendering the graphics. Your system is better than mine (less GFX card) and I was using a 770 previously, with no issues in other PBR sims like DCS.

[gman5250]

Running the B-26K in an extended flight over a control area where I know performance expectations.
I'm seeing negligible, if any impact on performance. It's important to understand that PBR controls multiple parameters in the metallic layer...one texture sheet. This has the net effect of eliminating texture sheets that previously were required on some models.

[gman5250]

Best viewed in motion. Here's a brief 360 pan of the PBR skin for the K. I'm working on a longer "inflight" video today. I'll post that up as soon as it's finished.

I haven't converted the entire model...yet. So far the skins and canopy are PBR, the other bits will take a little longer. The potential, even at this stage is awesome. If and when we go to full PBR it's going to be spectacular. IMO

Video Link:

https://www.brighteon.com/5982963103001


https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7879/46386444212_4b723cb8e8_o.jpg

[jeansy]

That looks awesome and glad youre showing its potential

[roger-wilco-66]

Great stuff, Gordon. I'm at the weapons.


Best,
Mark

[gman5250]

As promised, I put together a twenty minute "beauty" video of the B-26K re-skinned in PBR.

The process of converting this aircraft made it clear to me that we are entering in to an entirely new level of flight simulation. The process is logical, but will likely be a bit of a new approach to developing aircraft and scenery art. Once understood, the process is much cleaner and requires less or zero faking the sim to achieve results.

This video is an attempt to show the PBR materials in a variety of lighting and weather conditions. I've used a variety of techniques, exploring different levels of aluminum finish and wear. The results of this first attempt were encouraging, as I used my original texture sheets for the art, metalness, gloss and normal mapping. Of course, much of the "cargo" attached to previous methods were dropped, allowing the PBR engine to do the heavy lifting.

At this stage of development the basic airframe skins and canopy materials are fully PBR. The rest of the model translated quite well, but will be updated to full PBR as well.

Enjoy the video and please feel free to add your comments, suggestions or questions. I'm happy to share the results of my testing with any and all interested.

And...Merry Christmas to all. :very_drunk:

Video Link

https://www.brighteon.com/5983175262001


B-36K Counter Invader in Prepar3Dv4.4
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4902/45720749994_252319de12_o.jpg

[n4gix]

Very nicely done Gordon! Merry Christmas and best wishes for a New Year! :listening_headphone

[gman5250]

Very nicely done Gordon! Merry Christmas and best wishes for a New Year! :listening_headphone


Thank you Bill, and a Merry Christmas to you and your family.

I suppose I will be needing to make more videos as well. I have a long list of music suitable for such endeavors.

[crashaz]

Amazing work! Guess I need to pull my TBD Devastator out and getting those glorious pre-war liveries done.

[Rotorhead135]

Which dds format do you use for the metallic map? I´ve noticed imagetool can´t handle the dds files.




Rotorhead

[Mach3DS]

Ok, now that Gordon helped me through my technical issues, I'm finally cooking with gas. Thanks a bunch Gordon!

Here's my first REAL foray with a test article. The XF-92A by Milton and Team. I've converted the Tail, Fuselage and wings to PBR to test the waters in P3D. It's different from DCS, but very similar. So far good results. One thing I've found is that The sky really needs a good dark blue for contrast. I'm using REX sky texture "high flyer" for best results.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7922/45871645914_248b89e07d_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4813/45871645674_fc148c0303_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4820/45871645754_44ca78b09d_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4895/32721617618_8daf866b7b_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7817/32721617018_4a977e586b_o.jpg

[gman5250]

I used DXT5, created with the NVIDIA plugin in Photoshop. I use that tool for the albedo and normal files.

[gman5250]

Ok, now that Gordon helped me through my technical issues, I'm finally cooking with gas. Thanks a bunch Gordon!

Man..that looks fantastic Rick! Glad my input got you up and running.

Hang on to your hats...Rick is in the house....:encouragement::very_drunk:

[Jen]

Waauww. That looks absolutely stunning.. A new era is dawning :applause::applause:

Soren

[Mach3DS]

Ha! Thanks Gordon. Jen is right this is a dawning of a new era. Glad to be a very small part of it. Looking forward to all your works my friend.

[gman5250]

Ha! Thanks Gordon. Jen is right this is a dawning of a new era. Glad to be a very small part of it. Looking forward to all your works my friend.

All of a sudden I'm hearing Karen Carpenter singing..."We've only just begun". That's just wrong!!!:dizzy:

[Priller]

All of a sudden I'm hearing Karen Carpenter singing..."We've only just begun". That's just wrong!!!:dizzy:

The Carpenters notwithstanding, all the above video's and shots prove that P3D is the platform of the future!!

I wonder what v5 will bring! ;)

Priller

[Montie]

This PBR progress is making me want to paint again. But I have a question, I know a need a paintkit for an aircraft with active PBR materials (maybe?), but when I eventually come across, then will I need a “PBR program” or is this manageable through Photoshop?

[Mach3DS]

Can all be done in PS. Nothing "special" is required for PBR. It's just a recipe for the gfx engine to render. My tests were done completely in PS. Do other apps exist to make work flow easier? Yes! But not required.

[Mach3DS]

Making some progress in the lighting that I'm looking for. Need to put some good back into the paint....

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7866/46608010521_c345c4b496_o.jpg

[Mach3DS]

A few more at different angles. This is so much fun!!!

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4828/46557080102_8397fc12f3_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4828/46557080152_038d8fa1d5_o.jpg

https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7925/46557080202_14265b7d40_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4825/46557080002_a44c363198_o.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4907/46557080052_8a0f1d1cfb_o.jpg

[kdfw]

wow, looks fantastic. how does it look on the ground at dusk? the maddog80's bare metal pbr glows yellow on the shady side at dusk lighting condition, wondering if this can be overcome.

[Mach3DS]

Interesting! I've no idea....I never tried that time yet with the new PBR....let me see....Indeed....It does glow an orange-yellow...strange. I think it may be the night emissive .lua script. I'm not sure how to edit it. But I copied the F-16's .mdl PBR properties and used the default script. I'm not sure if that is what is causing it or not, but it's my first guess. I wonder if they did the same? Totally unsure. It only lasts until sunset, once dusk turns the color then switches back to a more "normal".

[Mach3DS]

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4867/45886887474_39e880a2fa_o.jpg

[Montie]

Beautiful.

[Sundog]

Maybe now I'll try texturing metal again. My metal textures always looked like "super-glossy" gray-blue before. That looks brilliant Rick, both figuratively and literally. :very_drunk:

I have one quick question now: Does the paint layer have it's own alpha separate from the metal layer/PBR layer that will only effect the paint? Or do we have to "cut out" (full black or white, I don't remember which way it works in P3D) the alpha where the metal is, and then vice versa to the PBR where the paint is? Or do you adjust the PBR for the different shine based on where metal or paint is, the same way we would adjust the alpha layer before based on if it was over metal or paint, etc.? Thanks.

[centuryseries]

Rick, I've taken the A-12 out in P3D V4.4 and everything works, while I have the SDK, are you saying that PBR can be applied to an aircraft without modifying the aircraft mdl file?

If so that's great, would like to see what the bare metal A-12 would look like. Might give me some ideas for one of my two possible next projects, (U-2C)....

[Mach3DS]

Rick, I've taken the A-12 out in P3D V4.4 and everything works, while I have the SDK, are you saying that PBR can be applied to an aircraft without modifying the aircraft mdl file?

If so that's great, would like to see what the bare metal A-12 would look like. Might give me some ideas for one of my two possible next projects, (U-2C)....

Unfortunately, no. (Isn't it always the case!) The MDL must be modified with the PBR materials added. Even in my example above, the model itself is not exported correctly. The PBR is done correctly but I've messed up on some other things, giving me some transluscent areas inside the VC when viewed from outside. I'm sure it's something straight forward and simple that I simply didn't do in the conversion with MCX. However, my 3D modeling skills are not the same as my Texturing skills. So gman_5250 or another Modeler using PBR might need to answer your export questions. However, the A-12 is one that I'm longing to see with PBR!

I used MCX to convert an existing .mdl file. It would be much better to apply the settings in 3DS max and then export into the sim from the source file as gman has done with his test example.

[DaveWG]

The PBR is done correctly but I've messed up on some other things, giving me some transluscent areas inside the VC when viewed from outside. I'm sure it's something straight forward and simple that I simply didn't do in the conversion with MCX.

Rick, make sure you're using the very latest dev release of MCX. The first version with 4.4 PBR support had a bug that caused non-PBR materials to be exported with the wrong settings & showed up translucent.

[Mach3DS]

Thanks DaveWG! I will look into that...hopefully fixes my issues!

[jeansy]

Rick, make sure you're using the very latest dev release of MCX. The first version with 4.4 PBR support had a bug that caused non-PBR materials to be exported with the wrong settings & showed up translucent.

thats what i seem to be getting as well

[Mach3DS]

Maybe now I'll try texturing metal again. My metal textures always looked like "super-glossy" gray-blue before. That looks brilliant Rick, both figuratively and literally. :very_drunk:

I have one quick question now: Does the paint layer have it's own alpha separate from the metal layer/PBR layer that will only effect the paint? Or do we have to "cut out" (full black or white, I don't remember which way it works in P3D) the alpha where the metal is, and then vice versa to the PBR where the paint is? Or do you adjust the PBR for the different shine based on where metal or paint is, the same way we would adjust the alpha layer before based on if it was over metal or paint, etc.? Thanks.

Sorry didn't answer this previously. You've probably looked into it already, but if not, the method for achieving the "look" has completely changed using PBR. The diffuse (called albedo) map alpha channel now has NO effect (when using PBR) on the textures. Everything is driven from the "metallic" map.

[Montie]

Just look at this impressive preview by LatinVFR


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaZNelKaelQ

[jeansy]

Just look at this impressive preview by LatinVFR


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaZNelKaelQ

they have already released a PBR airport https://secure.simmarket.com/latinvfr-santiago-scelv2-p3dv4.phtml

I bought back in NOV and got the PBR update when v4.4 was released, its a beautiful airport in PBR

[Obie311]

My V4.3.29.25520 is working perfectly. I usually stay inside the cockpit and only use the locked spot and tower view to debrief my lousy landings.

I'm afraid if I take one step forward and upgrade to 4.4, something else will go awry.

Is it worth it for me to take the plunge for whatever benefit PBR offers?

[jeansy]

My V4.3.29.25520 is working perfectly. I usually stay inside the cockpit and only use the locked spot and tower view to debrief my lousy landings.

I'm afraid if I take one step forward and upgrade to 4.4, something else will go awry.

Is it worth it for me to take the plunge for whatever benefit PBR offers?

is it worth it? I say yes the updates fix and add new things, you might as well stay with FSX if you dont apply the fixes and new content

if you follow the instructions by LM, you cant go wrong

the fix and addition list for v4.4 for all 3 exes is quite substantial https://www.prepar3d.com/latest-news/



(https://www.prepar3d.com/latest-news/)

[Mach3DS]

That Scenery looks good, but I don't understand why the concrete and/or asphalt is reflecting the sun??? I'm assuming it's evenly covered in water/ice?

[jeansy]

That Scenery looks good, but I don't understand why the concrete and/or asphalt is reflecting the sun??? I'm assuming it's evenly covered in water/ice?

Rick its a demo of pbr effects on a wet runway during a shower

[Mach3DS]

Double post.

[Mach3DS]

Strange on my end the video is not clear about the showers! No wonder I'm confused! Probably because I'm watching on my phone ...should have used PC monitor!

[Obie311]

is it worth it? I say yes the updates fix and add new things, you might as well stay with FSX if you dont apply the fixes and new content

if you follow the instructions by LM, you cant go wrong

the fix and addition list for v4.4 for all 3 exes is quite substantial https://www.prepar3d.com/latest-news/

(https://www.prepar3d.com/latest-news/)

Okay you talked me into updating.

I downloaded Prepar3D_v4_Academic_4.4.16.27077.zip, Prepar3D_v4_SDK_Setup_4.4.16.27106.msi, and Prepar3D_Download_and_Install_Instructions_v4.pdf. I unzipped Prepar3D_v4_Academic_4.4.16.27077.zip and double clicked Setup_Prepar3D.exe. The install commenced and took a little while to update everything. I installed over the existing P3D V4 version, I did not uninstall the previous version.

When I now open P3D and look at the "About" tab it still shows version 4.3.29.25520. When I open the Vehicle library, it still shows all lame Lockheed Martin Beeches and the Carenado A36 Bonanza. Is this right? Is this the new iteration with PBR?

Should I have run Install_Client.msi, Install_Content.msi, Install_Scenery.msi in addition to the Setup_Prepar3D.exe? Color me puzzled.

[62stratfan]

I did the update with the three *.msi files. I didn't have to delete the existing P3d application that way. To use the setup.exe I believe you must delete the entire previous version first. That will also remove any add-ons, I think. Using the msi's I still have my add-ons intact. About says 4.4.16.27077 and I have the Commander, C-130 and no Bonanza so I guess I did it correctly. Give it a try. It'll be worth it as PBR becomes de rigueur.

62stratfan

[Obie311]

I did the update with the three *.msi files. I didn't have to delete the existing P3d application that way. To use the setup.exe I believe you must delete the entire previous version first. That will also remove any add-ons, I think. Using the msi's I still have my add-ons intact. About says 4.4.16.27077 and I have the Commander, C-130 and no Bonanza so I guess I did it correctly. Give it a try. It'll be worth it as PBR becomes de rigueur.

62stratfan

I uninstalled the Client and reinstalled it from the download and did the Content and Scenery. Now the "About" shows version 4.4.16.27077 but I still have the Beech aircraft and no "Commander" . I wonder what I did wrong?

BTW '65 Strat L-series here 3 color sunburst, about 95%. I had a hardtail '62 that I sold because the cosmetics weren't so nice. Now I appreciate the patina and authentic "road worn" look on it. Bad move but I was young.

[62stratfan]

Be sure you uninstall the Content and Scenery from the Add or Remove Programs feature in Windows first. It'll ask if you want to cancel, or something, your license. Say No to that. Then use the *.msi. Looks like you got the Client in OK. I wish LM would make updating a 1 click operation.

62stratfan

PS. I don't have any old stuff any more. I use a '12 Am Std CAR/RW Strat for live performance and it's just a joy to play. Fat '50s, 22 big frets, flat radius. Far and away my fav Strat. I had a '60 6120 in the '80s that I'd give almost anything to have back. Oh well!

[Obie311]

Be sure you uninstall the Content and Scenery from the Add or Remove Programs feature in Windows first. It'll ask if you want to cancel, or something, your license. Say No to that. Then use the *.msi. Looks like you got the Client in OK. I wish LM would make updating a 1 click operation.


Many thanks for the advice and help! This sequence worked. Oddly enough I not only have the new aircraft but the update didn't dislodge the original Beech aircraft (not that I cared either way as I have the MilViz B55 for my Beech twin flying)

[jeansy]

for the people who did install the scenery update, have you noticed the PBR effect on the generic autogen objects?

Im yet to do as I dont have the time just yet to reinstall some 3rd party files that overwrite the generic textures

[62stratfan]

the update didn't dislodge the original Beech

Wow, good for you, Obie311. I wonder how that happened.



I haven't noticed a difference in autogen. Normally I have that turned off for a few more FPS. The only PBR asset I'm aware of is the native F-16. PBR has been a big thing with the railroad sim Trainz for about 6 months where most of the PBR assets are track, terrain textures and some ground effects. You can definitely see the difference. There's a very noticeable 3D effect.

62stratfan

[StormILM]

After I made the upgrade, I noticed a significant increase in my FPS and general smoothness. The only negative for me is that I needed to re-install or reactivate most of my addon scenery and update some of my aircraft to take advantage of the PBR.