- 536
- United States
GT Sport - Trailers, Videos and Screenshots
- Thread starter sk8er913
- 17,667 comments
- 2,094,212 views
- 14,434
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
So when I specifically mention how the lighting is making it look odd, I'm not talking about lighting? Again, its all good if you think its fine, but you shouldn't be trying to throw around subtle insults because you disagree with others.
You're right, it's not the only picture, and there are more. It just doesn't happen with all of them. This one looks marginally worse than others, so I'm not so sure its limitation, but more so, implementation.
You're very clear, I just don't agree with it.
Except that you replied to basically everyone with that post, telling them that they need to step outside because they don't agree with you.
Yes, it is. But i wanted to say when i said good for me, it doesnt implicate the numerous bugs ( wheel, reflection etc) for the lighting
Again for my first post, it was not my intention, and i m sorry that you take it as an insult, bit for me it like an advice, a starting of answer for my opinion because i had been thought it
We can say implementation too, there re a link between this and limitation, placing 3d on a 2d background, sure we will see some bugs, background cant interact with the model so we know the result when it s more complex
It s not what i mean when i talk about knowledge, bit it s fine if you re not agree with me
Basically to these who are curious yes, but again that was not an insult
Otherwise, when i replied to the person, i answered to his own opinion
- 548
- Greece
- geo_opel_tigra
I don't say that the shadow down from the audi isn't weird...The only real way that a shadow could be reduced as much as it has been here is if the sun is halfway behind the horizon. For example:
The sun is significantly lower. And the car is way higher off the ground. And the shadow is still darker than the one in the scape.
But i can said you two thinks...
The game is not complete
And second
Have you ever heard about indirect lighting on cgi?
I can help you before you start searching and Google it...
http://renderstuff.com/vray-indirect-illumination-best-settings-cg-tutorial/
- 903
- Tasmania
- RobUrabus
The Audi Image posted is totally wrong,
As said elsewhere,
the Background and the Car are shot with two different Focal Lengths.
Looks like a very bad effort at cut and paste using MS Paint.
But at the end of the day, it probably won't affect 90% of GT SPort buyers.
I know I won't use it.
As long as the "Hood View" looks realistic, and in the right position (drivers eye-level), in-game I'll be satisfied
As said elsewhere,
the Background and the Car are shot with two different Focal Lengths.
Looks like a very bad effort at cut and paste using MS Paint.
But at the end of the day, it probably won't affect 90% of GT SPort buyers.
I know I won't use it.
As long as the "Hood View" looks realistic, and in the right position (drivers eye-level), in-game I'll be satisfied
I dunno, I obviously don't have the stats but 10% sounds about a fair number for people that will seriously make use of photo mode and now scapes on a regular basis, perhaps even a bit high. The majority are still buying these games to drive and race cars, their main purpose.
Most will probably try it a few times every now and then but as I say I think that's about right for the people that will mostly ignore it. Bear in mind 10% of GT6 players would still be 500,000, that seems like a lot of photo enthusiasts.
Anyway, it's not like it'll affect any percentage of the players a great deal. With 1000+ scape photos and so many variables some are bound to not work as well as the others, photographers can just ignore those few and work with the rest. Not a big deal, people only pointed it out and noticed because PD strangely chose to show it off front and centre on the website.
- 2,240
- Lima
- gohan_girabyt3
- gohan_girabyt3
syntex123
Staff Emeritus
- 4,884
- Tønsberg, Norway
- syntex123
- Syntex260Z
It's like.. The scale of it is all wrong. Might be because it's a near shot and zoomed out max, the Mini is what it is, mini. Wonder if they fix it in the final product, the scape itself is good but how it is right now.. Way off
- 17,100
- United Kingdom
Took me 30 seconds to shoot this on my potato. All models are 1:18th. The Z4 wing is not as tall as the BMW 700 on the left, and the car in front of that is an X5 Dakar. The nose of the Z4 is also even close to overlapping the 700 - probably closer than the 458 is to the Mini in the GT Scape.
edit: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@35.6...MfAtiwVKPWUGnZRlnw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Last edited:
syntex123
Staff Emeritus
- 4,884
- Tønsberg, Norway
- syntex123
- Syntex260Z
I don't see your point with the street view though? @MatskiMonk
- 17,100
- United Kingdom
- 17,100
- United Kingdom
Sorry for the double post, but I don't know how to edit a post with attached pictures without them disappearing...
.. but, for the removal of any other ambiguity, I'm saying that in terms of perspective and scale, the 458 scape is probably fine.
.. but, for the removal of any other ambiguity, I'm saying that in terms of perspective and scale, the 458 scape is probably fine.
- 14,434
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
The back of the Mini seems to be at the ending of the guard rail, and the ending of the lane marking can't be more than a 2-3ft behind it so they aren't too far apart concerning perceived depth. The front of the 458 and the rear of the Mini should be able to be judged similarly, and it looks like the top of the 458s fender is a good chunk higher than half of the Mini. Apparently a stock Mini's height is about 53" where as the 458 is apparently 47~" for the road car. So there is a discernible difference in the picture, in my opinion.
Going off the map view, that 458 takes up just as much lane as the actual truck.
Last edited:
- 17,100
- United Kingdom
Hmmm....
the Mini's rear tyre is somewhere within the length of the drain, closer to the far edge I think... the Fezza's wheel is touching the road a short way back from the end of the road marking...
If we apply those lines to the Street view.. this is the gap...
but since we still can't scale this, we don't know what that is...
So...
Given that within the 8ft wheel base of the Ferrari, the front wheel is 66% the height of the rear wheel... as shown here...
.. it's reasonable to assume that with a 2-3ft gap to the Mini, the Mini would be getting even smaller...
So... you say..
So.. this is your "Good Chunk"...
Even with NO distance between them, and NO perspective, the Ferrari wing already comes upto the Mini's waistline...
...
So... I'm seeing something that's plausible based on scale(ish) models and replicated photo, real world photos, and pretty accurate 3D models... and at a glance, you think the 458 is the size of a truck.
Let's just agree that we're seeing different things.
- 14,434
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
good lord you went to the extremes didnt you. A bit too much to try to reply to through a cell phone.I do think the 458 is looking wider than that truck.
The truck isnt a large one, but im not so sure the 458 is that wide either. If you move the rear to have it centered in the lane, it will darn well be taking up the whole thing. If you can work your magic on that and show me, but otherwise, there is definetely an issue with the size of the car, in my opinion.
- 10,956
- Canada
Lol! Looks like somebody doesn't have anything else better to do but to go into unnecessary depth for a single screenshot from GTS in attempt of making a point.
Last edited:
- 17,100
- United Kingdom
I have a desktop, much beer, and a long spotify playlist... I guess it does make it easier for me
The 458 GT car is likely to be regulation 2m wide I think.. however, even the road car is 76.3 inches wide (1937mm). Lets say the delivery truck is a HINO (first guess.. could be entirely wrong but it's the first one that came to mind), the cab width of a HINO 155 is 78.5 inches... so .. that would make the trucks somewhere between the width of the Ferrari road car and race car. It's not conclusive I admit, but given all the other aspects I've looked at, I'm still comfortable this car is to scale... PD might just have been unlucky with a Mini being parked there... they are little comedy fun-size cars in real life, and I think it throws this shot off.
edit:
Also.. once you've seen it.. THE CHILD'S HEAD CANNOT BE IGNORED!
- 14,434
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
2m wide is 78"~ which would make them relatively similar in width, yet the truck looks significantly smaller going by how much room the 458 is taking up. I just find it a bit odd how you talk about all the stops you used and use that minor dig at me "just taking a glance" and end it with calling me out for it looking a lot wider as if it was a stupid to say, when it very clearly is taking up more lane.I have a desktop, much beer, and a long spotify playlist... I guess it does make it easier for me
The 458 GT car is likely to be regulation 2m wide I think.. however, even the road car is 76.3 inches wide (1937mm). Lets say the delivery truck is a HINO (first guess.. could be entirely wrong but it's the first one that came to mind), the cab width of a HINO 155 is 78.5 inches... so .. that would make the trucks somewhere between the width of the Ferrari road car and race car. It's not conclusive I admit, but given all the other aspects I've looked at, I'm still comfortable this car is to scale... PD might just have been unlucky with a Mini being parked there... they are little comedy fun-size cars in real life, and I think it throws this shot off.
edit:
Also.. once you've seen it.. THE CHILD'S HEAD CANNOT BE IGNORED!
View attachment 579770
Last edited:
- 8,187
- Kaikoura, NZ
- Nato777
I do believe the 458 is too large and out of scale with the rest of the scape. @MatskiMonk does make a very good presentation on the angle of perspective though, however what makes it wrong in this image I think is that the background doesn't quite have the same scale of perspective as the Ferrari.
- 17,100
- United Kingdom
I don't mean to dig at you. All I'm doing is questioning if this photo deserves the criticism it's getting by attempting to quantify what we can see. I don't accept comments like "it looks off" without trying to quantify them and make up my own mind, and to be honest, to try and take this further will only rely on more supposition and increasingly iffy off-screen measurements... I've provided WAY more explanation as to why I think the scale of this photo is okay than anyone criticising it, so if it appears I'm having a minor dig at anyone providing no actual evidence for their opinion then, to be honest, I'm not sorry ---- but I would be fine with changing my mind if presented with suitable actual evidence contrary to my current opinion.
FWIW it does seem wide. But if the trucks we see are based on 4'6" to 4'9" Subaru, Honda, Suzuki or Daihatsu trucks on the market, then it would still make sense.
- 14,434
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
Its fine that you provided more information but it doesnt make you any more right. All that is for not when you can literally see how off the track width is, something you just willfully ignored the first time around and made a snide comment against myself. I didnt just say that it looks off, i explained why I thought that and you took it to extreme length. Even the explanation you gave when you finally looked into it doesnt add up either because if your measurements where correct then they would practically be the same width. Yet the truck looks to be taking up far less of the lane than what 2 inch difference youre trying to make it out to be.
- 8,187
- Kaikoura, NZ
- Nato777
Well then we need to factor in the perspective on the horizontal plane too - objects on the left side of the screen appear wider than the right side. If I take a ruler and measure across the screen the left lane is 75mm, the centre is 65mm and the right 40mm. Measuring the 458 on that same line in the centre lane it is 68mm, making it wider than the centre lane itself. The 458 at that point in the image should not be that wide.
The only way we will be able to tell if the scale is off though is to actually have the scape and position the Ferrari directly beside the Mini.
The only way we will be able to tell if the scale is off though is to actually have the scape and position the Ferrari directly beside the Mini.
- 13,861
- Adelaide
- Neomone
Lol. There are bikes freaking everywhere in Japan. Especially in the cities. If you look outside any train station there will be literally hundreds of bikes stacked up. And all of them what westerners would describe as granny bikes, with a lower middle bar and baskets attached.
You also have to register your bike, and if you're a gaijin then you will be stopped by the police all the time and asked if that is really your bike. We're a shifty bunch.
- 11,202
- Sweden
- eran0004
Here's a quick perspective analysis. I've marked the first vanishing point (vanishing point = where parallell lines meet at the horizon) for the scape (VP1_S) and the first vanishing point for the Ferrari (VP1_F). I also measured the second vanishing point for the Ferrari, but since it's way outside of the frame those lines are not included here. I then drew a horizon line (blue) for the Ferrari, between its two VP's, and then a horizon line (also blue) for the scape by guesstimating a horizontal line from VP1_S.
Two things to take note of:
1. The horizontal (left-right) discrepancy between VP1_S and VP1_F. Horizontal discrepancy can indicate two things:
2. The vertical (up-down) discrepancy between VP1_S and VP1_F. Since the Ferrari is placed on the road and if the road is flat (which it appears to be), the Ferrari's vanishing point should be on the same horizon as the road's vanishing point. This discrepancy indicates that the Ferrari is tilted in some way, either on it's X-axis (lateral), it's Y-axis (longitudinal) or a combination of both (relative to the scape). That the horizon line of the Ferrari is not parellell with the horizon line of the scape suggests that there is at least a Y-rotation.
Two things to take note of:
1. The horizontal (left-right) discrepancy between VP1_S and VP1_F. Horizontal discrepancy can indicate two things:
i. That the object is rotated along it's vertical axis (which the Ferrari appears to be, its rear wheel is on top of the road marking, while its front wheel is to the right of the road marking).
ii. That the object is using a different field of view. A wider field of view essentially draws the vanishing points closer towards the center of the image. In this case it seems likely that there is a difference in the field of view of the scape and of the car, although to be absolutely certain these things have to be calculated using rather complicated mathematics... but in my opinion I'd say that it looks like there are different fields of view, which in turn would also explain why the rear end of the car looks like it's taking up the whole lane, while the front of the car seems more in proportion with the Mini.
ii. That the object is using a different field of view. A wider field of view essentially draws the vanishing points closer towards the center of the image. In this case it seems likely that there is a difference in the field of view of the scape and of the car, although to be absolutely certain these things have to be calculated using rather complicated mathematics... but in my opinion I'd say that it looks like there are different fields of view, which in turn would also explain why the rear end of the car looks like it's taking up the whole lane, while the front of the car seems more in proportion with the Mini.
2. The vertical (up-down) discrepancy between VP1_S and VP1_F. Since the Ferrari is placed on the road and if the road is flat (which it appears to be), the Ferrari's vanishing point should be on the same horizon as the road's vanishing point. This discrepancy indicates that the Ferrari is tilted in some way, either on it's X-axis (lateral), it's Y-axis (longitudinal) or a combination of both (relative to the scape). That the horizon line of the Ferrari is not parellell with the horizon line of the scape suggests that there is at least a Y-rotation.
Similar threads
- Poll
