Official v645 Thread

[OTTODAD]

Does this apply? https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showth...40#post1668140

No.

My MSTS has no problems using any loco or consist it it's 48 routes activities, the Route Riter would indicate if there are any !

Below is the ORTS source code file calling this UNKNOWN error message.

O t t o

[K5LLA]

I thought I did everything right? I got the previous version to work....

[conrail1]

I would expect it's a misunderstanding of how MSTS decides which parts of a signal model to show; OR is trying to show only the optional and not-default subobjects that correspond to the defined signal units. Obviously it's not matching MSTS in this case. It'll take time to properly investigate the individual signals.

Thanks James, is there something that I could change with the routes signal models (the names maybe) to correct the issue?

[twpol]

I thought I did everything right? I got the previous version to work....

Looks like your graphics card doesn't support the dynamic shadows in their current implementation. You should be able to play without them but please could you tell us your graphics card so we can evaluate future support.

Thanks James, is there something that I could change with the routes signal models (the names maybe) to correct the issue?

I can't offer any suggestions until I've had time to look at the individual signals, sorry. I'm snowed under today but it's on my list.

[K5LLA]

Looks like your graphics card doesn't support the dynamic shadows in their current implementation. You should be able to play without them but please could you tell us your graphics card so we can evaluate future support.

Graphics
------------ ---------- ------------ ---------- ------------ ---------- --------

Display adapter type Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset Family
Total available graphics memory 358 MB
Dedicated graphics memory 0 MB
Dedicated system memory 128 MB
Shared system memory 230 MB
Display adapter driver version 7.14.10.1329
Primary monitor resolution 1280x800
DirectX version DirectX 9.0 or better


Thanks for the quick reply, I know it's not the BEST computer, not even CLOSE but, you know what, for 350 bucks, I'll take it! LOL

[conrail1]

I can't offer any suggestions until I've had time to look at the individual signals, sorry. I'm snowed under today but it's on my list.

When you get a chance to look at them let me know if there something I can experiment with to remedy the issue.


One other question I have is about the shadows. If you look at the second screen shot from the top here-

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?300070-OpenRails-v645-performance

The shadows are a lot less detailed then they were in v360. Is this something that is temporary with v645 until the dynamic shadows are optimized?

[OTTODAD]

Thanks for the quick reply, I know it's not the BEST computer, not even CLOSE but, you know what, for 350 bucks, I'll take it! LOL

This might be the reason: http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question...5002011AAlPpvu ?

O t t o

[twpol]

One other question I have is about the shadows. If you look at the second screen shot from the top here-

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?300070-OpenRails-v645-performance

The shadows are a lot less detailed then they were in v360. Is this something that is temporary with v645 until the dynamic shadows are optimized?

I don't actually see many shadows in that post but they are deliberately soft-edged; in addition, we're using 4 smaller cascaded shadow maps rather than 1 huge shadow map, so detail will be lower further away. There's still tuning to do on the resolutions and ranges but they're not expected or intended to be high detail anywhere.

[conrail1]

I don't actually see many shadows in that post but they are deliberately soft-edged; in addition, we're using 4 smaller cascaded shadow maps rather than 1 huge shadow map, so detail will be lower further away. There's still tuning to do on the resolutions and ranges but they're not expected or intended to be high detail anywhere.

This is what I was referring to.

Take a look at the shadows of the poles in these two screens, there is a major difference in the detail between OR v645 and v360.

v645 -



v360 -







The same can be said about the palm tree shadows in this comparison. The shadows in v645 look like “blobs” compared to what we’ve seen in v360.

v645 –



v360 -

[muskokaandtahoe]

Graphics
------------ ---------- ------------ ---------- ------------ ---------- --------
Total available graphics memory 358 MB

Very likely that amount is not enough and what is there is taken from the system RAM which in turn can cause yet more issues for performance. Is this a laptop? FWIW, for graphics intensive applications, like games, expect performance on laptops, especially older laptops, to be poor.

[muskokaandtahoe]

Conrail1,

You're seeing two different "features" when comparing old to new. The first is the "lamppost/telephone pole" tree shadow. Been reported, not yet fixed.

The second one, "blob shadows" is a bluring that's been added to the shadows (for a number of reasons). There is another thread here about graphics and the editing the registry. Check that out and you'll see how it works.

Speaking for myself, I like the sharper graphics when they're cast by trees and wires, the blob shadows when cast by buildings, and depending on the car and locomotive, mostly blob but when there is a pantograph I don't care for it. IMO what it suggests to me is this is still a work-in-progress; If there was a way to signal blob shadows for this shape and sharpen them for that one (i.e., that probably means new shaders plus code added to the .sd file) I think then shadows in almost all situations would be close to ideal.

Ummm, and of course a fix for the "lamppost/telephone pole" shadow too.

[kox]

These differences are because of blur intensity. I think it could be changed with a simple variable on source code, if it can't be changed already from "outside".

[conrail1]

Conrail1,
You're seeing two different "features" when comparing old to new. The first is the "lamppost/telephone pole" tree shadow. Been reported, not yet fixed.
The second one, "blob shadows" is a bluring that's been added to the shadows (for a number of reasons). There is another thread here about graphics and the editing the registry. Check that out and you'll see how it works.
Speaking for myself, I like the sharper graphics when they're cast by trees and wires, the blob shadows when cast by buildings, and depending on the car and locomotive, mostly blob but when there is a pantograph I don't care for it. IMO what it suggests to me is this is still a work-in-progress; If there was a way to signal blob shadows for this shape and sharpen them for that one (i.e., that probably means new shaders plus code added to the .sd file) I think then shadows in almost all situations would be close to ideal.
Ummm, and of course a fix for the "lamppost/telephone pole" shadow too.

Dave, just so I’m sure we’re talking about the same shadow, in the first two screen shots on the previous page the shadow is above the B unit in the first screen (v645) and right above the A unit in the second screen (v360).

It didn’t look like a bug to me but an overall blurring like you mentioned in your response with all of the shadows in v645.

I agree with you on what shadows should be sharp and what should be blurred, I guess it all comes down to reaching a compromise between detail and performance and of course like you said keeping in mind that this is WIP.

These differences are because of blur intensity. I think it could be changed with a simple variable on source code, if it can't be changed already from "outside".

kox , I’m wondering if there isn’t something we can experiment with along the lines of what James has mentioned in this thread –

https://www.trainsim.com/vbts/showthread.php?300046-Dynamic-Shadow-performance-adjustments

[K5LLA]

Very likely that amount is not enough and what is there is taken from the system RAM which in turn can cause yet more issues for performance. Is this a laptop? FWIW, for graphics intensive applications, like games, expect performance on laptops, especially older laptops, to be poor.

Yes, it's a Toshiba Satellite A205, ha! Not too old, handles MSTS fairly well, averaging around 20 FPS on most routes.

This might be the reason: http://in.answers.yahoo.com/question...5002011AAlPpvu ?

O t t o

Thanks Otto!

[twpol]

It didn’t look like a bug to me but an overall blurring like you mentioned in your response with all of the shadows in v645.

I agree with you on what shadows should be sharp and what should be blurred, I guess it all comes down to reaching a compromise between detail and performance and of course like you said keeping in mind that this is WIP.

It's not so much performance vs detail, although that obviously matters, but visual appearance. I really don't have time to go in to all the details but ultimately the blur is needed to make the shadows look good as a consequence of other changes to avoid the "faint near object" issues in earlier versions. All of it can and probably will change as we gain futher understanding of how the various technique interact, what peoples' systems can actually support and where people want the rendering enegery focused.