Therefor I will continue to try to prove for him that he is not neccesary right all the time. This is how this "missunderstanding" started anyway, which i find rather childish! He started all the personal attacks, telling me I didnt have the skill to tell HIM about what is the sky color and brightnes where I live! As far I know, he doesnt live this far north as I do so how could he know better than me about how the sky actully looks like out my window, right!
You really do walk into these things, do you? I happen to live in central Finland. So as far as you know I could not know better than you, but you don't actually know. There's a theme to that - the statements you make are in no reasonable relation to what you actually know or understand.
I think the particular topic of out-of-the-window comparisons has been explained to you before. ALS gets you very close to the reality if the underlying atmosphere model is set to what it is in reality. However, to do that is complicated and a METAR report is way short on information, so the weather system largely has to guess. Differences between reality and FG are largely driven by the accuracy of that guess. If the guess works out, you may get as close as this with ALS:
I think a user has even proven to you that ALS gets visuals as in a shot you posed once the atmosphere is adjusted. Is there any particular reason you go on about this?
It's fairly high level to complain about visual mismatches with reality at all, since pre-ALS (and in Rembrandt) the pre-dawn sky looks like this (with very little variation ever):
Strangely enough, with all your rants against ALS, I never see you comment on these visuals which are obviously not what you get from your window - which means you're cherry-picking problems.
Note that this yellow sky is actually extremely stable code. That's a difference you fail to appreciate - unstable code crashes, but stable code can still result in plenty of visual oddities.
Instead he try to tectalk it away by claiming what I see on the screen is wrong because of ambient lightning in the room. Anyway I will try to prove this is totaly "mad professor" fantasies by posting pictures of reality vs ALS.
Like many people, you resort to calling things 'techalk' when they go over your head. But that doesn't make them go away unfortunately. So why don't you perhaps include the default rendering sky in the comparison just as well? Just to appreciate how 'buggy' ALS really is in comparison?
The most important is facts, right?? Not WHO is right, but WHAT is right!!
Quite so - and there's pretty much nothing in that department from your side. I would take you a lot more seriously if you would get your facts straight and produce evidence for what you say on a regular basis, discuss arguments rather than attitudes,... But what you do is make strong claims based on not knowing/understanding things, and that I can not take seriously.
Hello, I am trying to help him make hes contribution better. More close to reality!
Do you honestly think that looking at a real photograph and comparing with a FG screenshot is not something I can do myself, and that I need your help for that? Do you think any developer needs this kind of 'help' (which is really a feature-request in disguise)?
The question of rendering is not 'could things be closer to reality' - the answer to that is unconditionally yes. Things are never perfect. Any moron can work that one out without help. The real question is how do we get there and keep the framerate fast enough. If you want to genuinely help, work on that question. But here, you actually need to use a brain.
HELLO. He was insulting me in the first place. Its all about being objective right. I was, he was not!!
You've been shown a handful of times now by different people not to have the facts right. In what sense would that be objective please? Just to give an example - you continue to call ALS 'buggy' without having pointed out a single genuine bug (not looking perfect is not a bug). You go on about ALS being unstable in spite of the fact that it has been told to you that this is conceptually impossible. There's no evidence that you would care for objectivity more than for your attitude - if you were objective, we'd have heard 'Sorry, I made a mistake.' from you more than one time by now.
Done. And I almost got sick. It was a discusting attitude against the userbase. But hell yeah, Lets write a wiki articles telling the public, WE DONT NEED YOU. Only contributors here please.
No, that's manifestly not what the text says. The text says if you want to have influence, you don't get it for free. I understand that this apparently disgusts you, but the fact of the matter is that I do not need you, you don't have a convincing case for anything, and so your opinion on where ALS is going is irrelevant since I am doing the work. Deal with it or rant away what you should be entitled to (by virtue of what exactly?), I don't particularly care.
Open Source is about sharing knowledge, and thats the bonus in Open Source. The attitude and why they start a project is actually mainly because there is a marked for it and that they get motivated working for the userbase.
Sure. Linux kernel developers will readily jump to your attention if you have a problem or a wish, because they so enjoy interacting with the userbase. Have you ever tried that? It's what you want OpenSource to be, not what it is. As for sharing knowledge, all ALS is openly accessible code - go ahead and read it, you might learn something useful in the process, if only what shaders do.
simple because I dont think Thorsten would be hanging around that long, when rembrandt is getting maintained again or optimized, or that someone trying to implement a new rendering engine into it. No more need for ALS bugs
You don't get it, do you? I don't do ALS to win a popular vote. I do it because I was always fascinated by looking out of the window of airplanes, seeing light playing across the clouds, and I am given the opportunity to re-create that on my computer - promise my friend a nice virtual sunset, explore interesting scenes,.... The maintenance of Rembrandt has had zero impact historically on ALS development - why ever should it? Having Rembrandt AND ALS around is an asset for FG - more options for people.
Why didnt Thorsten just ignore me if he knew he wouldnt agree with me, as he sayd he would.
Because you insist in ignoring what has been explained to you, continue to be disruptive and hence need to be dealt with, and I have the time to do so right now. Spreading your bile in the forum is one thing, spreading false information is quite another thing - I can ignore the first, but not the second as it will create problems downstream.
Statistics: Posted by Thorsten — Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:41 am