Link to the OC.UK thread please?
Even if there were a difference, would a screenshot even show it? I'd have thought you'd need to take snaps with a camera
Is It Better?
It's important to note that, from a strictly empirical standpoint, we've actually made this photo worse, because we've removed pixel detail. However, people's personal preferences when it comes to photography have nothing to do with empirical measurements of pixel data. Some people absolutely hate this look, others can't get enough. Whether the photo is "better" or not after the adjustment in terms of aesthetics is completely in the eye of the beholder.
Keep in mind though that this does represent a popular trend. The upside of following trends is that your work stays fresh and in line with what people like. The downside is that trends change quickly, so what's popular today might make your photo look ugly and out of date tomorrow. Be especially aware of this as you build your professional portfolio. Hang on to those unedited versions of your images, they may come in handy when it's time to update your site later!
The fact that people in the original source thread can't tell the difference between black crush and "it looks so much better on the AMD side" makes me ashamed to be a Radeon fan. Win with data, not emotions and desires.
The fact that anyone in that thread pushing this "black crush" conspiracy, thinks they even have any clue in the world what their talking about is the appalling part. I've never read so much ignorance in one thread. Confusing character shadowing, and incorrectly set gamma (and possibly video levels) for some sort of black crush conspiracy that magically hides detail, is about the most misinformed thing i've ever read.
This isn't about colors, gamma, blacks, vibrancy of colors on AMD vs washed out on NV (which I have experienced myself).
This is about short lod distance, poor texture filtering, missing details (like bricks on the pavement, long distance objects).
Possible reasons for the poorer rendering:
1. The guy fake his control panel, overriding settings. Such as disabling AF (which still won't explain the lod distance problem). <- possible, we can't trust randoms on the interwebz!
2. Youtube compression causes one-half of the video to be worse. <- unlikely
3. The guy actually have Titan X on High settings in-game and not Ultra. <- possible.
4. NV has a driver bug for some games. <- possible.
5. NV has a driver "feature" or "optimizations" for some games. <- possible.
Haha, I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or against me (rethinking my response to you in the other thread.)
I think this post is what set me off because it reminded me about the black crush issues in consoles and how it was defended during one generation:
The original capture video was terrible, but some people took that as "NV is cheating with IQ settings. FPS crown in question!"
look at this image:
The XBOX pic clearly has shadowing and shading that the PS4 version does not. Look at the shadow being cast by the grenades. Look at the shadow being cast by his goggles, look at the shadow being cast by his head onto the exo-frame. You're confused into thinking that the image should be washed out enough so you can make everything out clearly. There is not detail being hidden, there are shadows being cast that aren't in the PS4 image, and better ambient occlusion being used. the XBOX image does look better, because it is better.
In all, it's our first chance to see Battlefield 4's multiplayer mode in action on Xbox One, and to witness either version of the game running on final retail hardware. On the visual side, HBAO is indeed added to the Xbox One version, as promised by DICE following its omission in the Stockholm build. However, the divide in internal resolution - which remains at 900p on PS4 compared to the straight 720p on Xbox One - is the big sticking point, even with the removal of the Xbox version's sharpening filter which amplified the aliasing. Put simply, the assets and effects are identical for each next-gen platform, but the added pixel definition on PS4 spares it from the distracting edge-crawl on thin objects that proves to be an issue on the Microsoft side.
It's interesting to note that the majority of native 1080p titles - including Need for Speed: Rivals, Lego Marvel Super Heroes and Tomb Raider - do not have gamma issues at all. Developer contacts tell us that the phenomenon is linked to the use of the Xbox One scaler in combination with the utilisation of multiple display planes (allowing native and sub-native elements to blend in the final framebuffer). This is backed up by our experience with Battlefield 4. The pre-final code utilised the Xbox One hardware scaler and featured an unnatural gamma shift, while the release version saw the implementation of a software scaler created by DICE itself that resolved the colour balance issue in addition to removing the sharpening effect.
Okay, clearly you don't know what black crush does either, here you go:
Shadows had to be updated on the Xbone version to match the PS4, but still dat black crush! It created the illusions you mistake as "better shadows"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogqpvVR4kEo
If you can't see the black crush on the Xbone version - there is nothing left for us to discuss. This is a known issue for MSFT. So bad they already tried to address it TWICE. BF4 came after the first address of the issue. [DICE] studios said it was due to the upscale algorithm MSFT was using to get from <1080p on the game render to 1080p for output.
That's an issue with the sharpening filter (and some weird shadow artifacting on one of the characters), not black crush.EDIT #2:
Before and After shots:
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/ar...nch_2_copy.bmp.jpg/EG11/quality/90/format/jpg
http://images.eurogamer.net/2013/ar...tch_2_copy.bmp.jpg/EG11/quality/90/format/jpg
Anyways, this is getting OT. But there are people that argued tooth and nail that the Before looked better.
Give me one single timestamp in that video that shows the Xbox crushing blacks.
That's an issue with the sharpening filter (and some weird shadow artifacting on one of the characters), not black crush.
I'm not sure you even understand what black crush is. You're clearly confusing the difference between a 2.2 and a 2.4 gamma (and shadow effects that are simply not existent in the PS4 version).
The logic you're using would say that the left half of this image has "black crush".
Whoops, linked you the wrong video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XqWRACk2zY
Let's try that experiment again.
I'm using the term as it is described in the photography/filmography sense. There is a RGB range difference (as you said) where the console was setting the upscale end result to limited. It was truncating the end scale of the both black and white. The sharpening issue is addressed by the clear softening of the image quality. The black levels by what the Xbone original scalar was doing.
Dinner, see that youtube video, tell me there is no issue. Ciao!
Gregster said:And I think we have found out what is going on. The default profiles let the 3D application decide what to do but switching to 'prefer max quality' makes that line nice and white
There you have it. Original guy who captured the first two videos redoes it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zC-VpCnexkU
No black crush.
Suddenly "the solid white lines" look faded and blurred on both sides.
The "zebra crossing" looks identical (covered by papers and debris).
But now you got another question:
Both sides show lower frame rates than the original videos he captured? Haha.
EDIT: I will attribute the lower FPS on both due to him capturing at a higher frame rate. If he did as he said and used exact same IQ/Panel settings as his first attempt.
Gregster found out what the problem was:
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18679713&page=7
The default settings/profile of Nvidia control panel don't produce the best quality, at least in BF4, only with "prefer max quality" AF was working as it should.
I wonder how many more games this happens and how many reviews are done with the default setting in the control panel or profiles.
Yep, that's what many had guessed was the issue, the default setting in the nvidia control panel seems to have issues with LOD in some games and forcing it to highest quality fixes the issue. I would think nvidia users would want to know this so they can make sure to set it correctly for highest quality.
is there a performance delta with these settings of just lack of visual fidelity?
is there a performance delta with these settings of just lack of visual fidelity?