Waz

[1.8] EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements [1.8.0-1]

Recommended Posts

On 10/12/2016 at 3:06 PM, Waz said:

I presume you just dump everything in your game data folder?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey @WazI was curious about a few things related to textures and performance - are png images converted to .dds during load? I'm curious because a lot of cubemaps textures are .png files to so the channels don't blend in compression. If they are all  converted in loading it would be better to save the RAM and file size and go with .dds...

Relating to performance, it feels as though new EVE is more GPU intensive than the pre-reboot ever was. I'm too reliant on the Scatterer-EVE integration (and cubemaps) to go back to KVE but I'm curious if there was a performance drop with the reboot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Avera9eJoe I don't think they are converted, but I have been wrong before. Poodmund converted some of my textures to cubemaps in the past and all were in dds format. If anybody in the forums, besides Waz, knows what EVE does to textures regards to compression and memory saving techniques, it's Poodmund. My point is, if they were converted by EVE, Poodmund wouldn't have gone through the trouble of doing it himself. I'm just spit balling here if course

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Holdground said:

Hello everyone I'm looking for some help this is my current settings and my current view and as you can see I don't think scattered or  Environmental Visual Enhancements 1.1-2 is working. Do you guys have any ideas how I may fix this.

You haven't provided any information as to what is going wrong or what you've tried to fix it, so your problem is impossible to fix at the moment.  You may have forgotten to include links to your "current settings" and "current view".  I recommend that you read and follow these directions if you would like some help.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/22/2017 at 5:36 AM, Brigadier said:

You haven't provided any information as to what is going wrong or what you've tried to fix it, so your problem is impossible to fix at the moment.  You may have forgotten to include links to your "current settings" and "current view".  I recommend that you read and follow these directions if you would like some help.

 

Yeah sorry for some reason they arent showing the pictures I attached, and the original problem was that RSS wasn't showing and then I uninstalled everything and reinstalled everything and RSS started working however there were no clouds. So I ended up Uninstalling and reinstalling everything again and I don't know what I did different but RSS is now working now and I have clouds yay. Thank for your guys help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Holdground said:

So I ended up Uninstalling and reinstalling everything again and I don't know what I did different but RSS is now working now and I have clouds yay. Thank for your guys help.

I'd love to take credit for solving the problem but it appears you did what you needed to do without much help from the community.  Well done and I'm glad you resolved it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need some help, I have the folders for EVE and EVEconfigs installed correctly, I believe. 

/Gamedata

then

/BoulderCo

and 

/Eve folder

both as they should be, but in game nothing shows up, no clouds on any planets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheNoobHunter24 said:

I need some help, I have the folders for EVE and EVEconfigs installed correctly, I believe. 

/Gamedata

then

/BoulderCo

and 

/Eve folder

both as they should be, but in game nothing shows up, no clouds on any planets.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question - What is "windowedIVA.cfg", and what does it do? I'm fairly certain it's tied with EVE in some way... I'm curious if it's needed, or if I can delete it?

 

EDIT: I think this comment is slightly irrelevant now - I see it's only included in Andromeda, indicating it's an outdated file from a previous version of EVE from my guess. :P

Edited by Avera9eJoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello! It seems that I have issues with volumetric clouds aka fog. I want to know, are these bugs just limitations of EVE or is there something wrong? I use EVE 1.2.2-1, Scatterer 0.320 with EVE integration turned on and Astronomer's Visual Pack 1.3 Updated and Repackaged on KSP 1.2.2

PNLfdRs.png

Edited by SpacePixel
one problem solved

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SpacePixel said:

Hello! It seems that I have issues with volumetric clouds aka fog. I want to know, are these bugs just limitations of EVE or is there something wrong? I use EVE 1.2.2-1, Scatterer 0.320 with EVE integration turned on and Astronomer's Visual Pack 1.3 Updated and Repackaged on KSP 1.2.2

PNLfdRs.png

Are you talking about the clouds clipping into the ground? If so, that's normal. Volumetric clouds cannot sit or contour to the surface. To get a "dust" or "fog" effect, this is the closest you will get. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 26.08.2017 at 6:53 PM, Galileo said:

Are you talking about the clouds clipping into the ground? If so, that's normal. Volumetric clouds cannot sit or contour to the surface. To get a "dust" or "fog" effect, this is the closest you will get. 

Thank you! I moved cloud layer a little higher, so it doesn't clip with ground on sea level and everything looks just great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/15/2017 at 1:26 PM, Avera9eJoe said:

Hey @WazI was curious about a few things related to textures and performance - are png images converted to .dds during load? I'm curious because a lot of cubemaps textures are .png files to so the channels don't blend in compression. If they are all  converted in loading it would be better to save the RAM and file size and go with .dds...

Relating to performance, it feels as though new EVE is more GPU intensive than the pre-reboot ever was. I'm too reliant on the Scatterer-EVE integration (and cubemaps) to go back to KVE but I'm curious if there was a performance drop with the reboot?

DDS can store images compressed (DXT) or uncompressed and EVE/KSP/Unity will load them as that. PNG files have to be loaded uncompressed, and AFAIK KSP does not compress the result (it could, with Texture2D.Compress).

There is nothing in particular I did when porting that would have reduced performance - I mostly just fixed compilation problems. If there was a perf drop, it could be from KSP's port to Unity 5, some other change in KSP 1.2, or of course from something I missed or messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm trying to get tilted clouds to work on two gas giants in my install and I've run into a problem.

When a ship approaches either of the planets (specifically when it gets within 2,000,000,000m) the clouds disappear. It only happens to these two planets with tilted clouds and it goes away as soon as the ship moves out beyond the previously mentioned distance. 

Here's the section for one of the planets in the "clouds" file.

	OBJECT
	{
		name = Saturn-clouds1
		body = Saturn
		altitude = 20000
		detailSpeed = 0,0,0
		speed = 0,0,100000
		killBodyRotation = True
		offset = -19,22,0
		rotationAxis1 = 0,0,1
		rotationAxis2 = 0,1,0
		settings
		{
			_MainTex = BoulderCo/Atmosphere/Textures/saturn1
			_DetailTex = BoulderCo/Atmosphere/Textures/detail1
			_UVNoiseTex = BoulderCo/Atmosphere/Textures/uvnoise1
			_DetailScale = 30
			_DistFadeVert = 4E-05
			_Color = 250,250,250,200
		}
		layer2D
		{
			shadowMaterial
			{
			}
			macroCloudMaterial
			{
				_DetailDist = 2E-06
			}
		}
		layerVolume
		{
			maxTranslation = 100,200,100
			size = 500,2.2
			area = 4500,4
			noiseScale = 1.2,1.3,90
			particleMaterial
			{
				_Tex = BoulderCo/Atmosphere/Textures/particle/rgb
				_BumpMap = BoulderCo/Atmosphere/Textures/particle/particle_NRM
				_LightScatter = 0.55
			}
		}
	}

 

Any help would be great! :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello.  I'm new to this mod so im not sure if this is a stupid question or not, but i was wondering if there was any way to turn down the "shimmering" effect of the clouds?  By "shimmering", i mean the effect that has the clouds brightness shift and change over time, making them look as if they are moving faster than they actually are.  I think the idea is cool but its way too heavy for my tastes.  Thank you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, VonFrank said:

Any help would be great! :) 

Try adding a PQS deactivation distance to the body:

PQS_MANAGER
{
	OBJECT
	{
		body = Saturn
		deactivateDistance = 175000
	}
}

... assuming the body name is Saturn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/6/2017 at 3:39 PM, Poodmund said:

Try adding a PQS deactivation distance to the body:


PQS_MANAGER
{
	OBJECT
	{
		body = Saturn
		deactivateDistance = 175000
	}
}

... assuming the body name is Saturn.

Thanks! That worked! 

I've added a very small deactivate distance to all of the objects that were giving me this issue and now the problem is gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Waz I'm trying to figure out how to render volume clouds further away from the camera when at low altitudes and cannot figure it out. The float layerVolume.VisibleRange seems to affect whether you are inRange for the particles to render but as far as I can see, the inRange determination is based on camera altitude and the EVE layer altitude but cannot for the life of my resolve a way to basically give the volume layers a larger horizontal draw distance.

Do you have any idea as to what affects this draw distance; say to render the volume layers further away when landed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Poodmund said:

@Waz I'm trying to figure out how to render volume clouds further away from the camera when at low altitudes and cannot figure it out. The float layerVolume.VisibleRange seems to affect whether you are inRange for the particles to render but as far as I can see, the inRange determination is based on camera altitude and the EVE layer altitude but cannot for the life of my resolve a way to basically give the volume layers a larger horizontal draw distance.

Do you have any idea as to what affects this draw distance; say to render the volume layers further away when landed?

The first value of the clouds area parameter is the radius; default 24km. Note that increasing it spreads out the clouds, so you usually need to either increase the second area value (integer number of subdivisions), or the size of the particles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Waz said:

The first value of the clouds area parameter is the radius; default 24km. Note that increasing it spreads out the clouds, so you usually need to either increase the second area value (integer number of subdivisions), or the size of the particles.

... but in this instance I would want a very focused area of clouds that remains targeted at a very specific location on the surface. I am using a cube map with 5 blank faces and 1, 2048x2048 face with just 1 pixel at the center where the clouds are to be rendered. I can then orient this cube map around the body to locate at the exact coordinates I require on the surface to get a very specific and concentrated area of volumetric particle clouds to occur, however, as stated above, they only appear when very close. Presently, they will only "pop-in" when the camera is in close proximity (area being around 4km) but what I would desire is the ability for these clouds to render when the camera is far away in the X & Z planes (?), basically further away when on the surface,.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Poodmund said:

... but in this instance I would want a very focused area of clouds that remains targeted at a very specific location on the surface. I am using a cube map with 5 blank faces and 1, 2048x2048 face with just 1 pixel at the center where the clouds are to be rendered. I can then orient this cube map around the body to locate at the exact coordinates I require on the surface to get a very specific and concentrated area of volumetric particle clouds to occur, however, as stated above, they only appear when very close. Presently, they will only "pop-in" when the camera is in close proximity (area being around 4km) but what I would desire is the ability for these clouds to render when the camera is far away in the X & Z planes (?), basically further away when on the surface,.

 

The volumetrics clouds are entirely determined by the main texture. Unfortunately, this means same-expensive fully-transparent particles everywhere on the planet.

The _DistFadeVert value determines the "popping in" distance (it should be set such that they fade in, not pop in), though I don't have a procedure other than trial and error for coming up with the appropriate value.

BTW, the clipping-into-ground that you showed earlier and which @Galileo correctly noted as "Normal" should be fixable by adding depth-buffer-based softness to the particles (InvFade), but I haven't looked into it yet as shown here:

4CFDEPO.jpg

Another cool option would be PQS clouds layer shapes (eg. following the land, 3D 2D layers, etc.). Feasibility TBD, but the clouds layers could be made into a PQS mesh.

Edited by Waz
correction - clouds2D not a PQS yet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Waz said:

The volumetrics clouds are entirely determined by the main texture. Unfortunately, this means same-expensive fully-transparent particles everywhere on the planet.

The _DistFadeVert value determines the "popping in" distance (it should be set such that they fade in, not pop in), though I don't have a procedure other than trial and error for coming up with the appropriate value.

Hmmm... so basically its not a viable proposition. The general idea was this:

Spoiler

9bCeINC.png

To try and get a very localised amount of smoke that is locked to the bodies rotation so that they always stay in place. Its just you couldn't even see the particles from the KSC which is located only a short distance away. I guess as all layers are populated across the whole sphere, having a very densely packed amount of volumetric particles is always a bad idea... you're going to see FPS loss even on the other side of the body?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Poodmund said:

Hmmm... so basically its not a viable proposition. The general idea was this:

  Hide contents

9bCeINC.png

To try and get a very localised amount of smoke that is locked to the bodies rotation so that they always stay in place. Its just you couldn't even see the particles from the KSC which is located only a short distance away. I guess as all layers are populated across the whole sphere, having a very densely packed amount of volumetric particles is always a bad idea... you're going to see FPS loss even on the other side of the body?

Yes, clouds are definitely not the way to achieve this. The correct way would be a PQS City with a particle system. I've never modded for Kopernicus or KerbinSide, so don't know the feasibility of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Waz, does EVE shadows support multiple stars?  I'm working on a mod that places planets around the secondary star of a binary system.  I've set up a cfg that lists all the bodies and shadow casters, but all the shadows I'm seeing have the primary star as the light source.  Is there a way to designate the secondary star as the light source for the shadows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.