***The High-Res Screenshot Thread!***

Seanspeed said:
That SweetFX profile you're using is truly, truly awful. Standard shot looks worlds better.
Click to expand...

Yeah. The profile generally works pretty well in darker locations but in this one it looks ridiculously oversaturated and obscures all the detail and depth of the characters. I'm not too fussed about using SFX since vanilla already looks very good but I think there are a couple of nice presets which are not as overblown. I'll probably try them out in the evening and post some screens if they're any good:p
 
Amatsubu said:
Yeah. The profile generally works pretty well in darker locations but in this one it looks ridiculously oversaturated and obscures all the detail and depth of the characters. I'm not too fussed about using SFX since vanilla already looks very good but I think there are a couple of nice presets which are not as overblown. I'll probably try them out in the evening and post some screens if they're any good:p
Click to expand...
Yea, I mean, you used a profile that obviously highly emphasized blues and took screenshots on a scene that is predominantly blue in the first place. Nothing good was going to come of that! lol

Frankly, from what I've seen, a very slight use of Vibrance for a tad extra color saturation, combined with the inherent sharpness improvements of a 4k downsample provide about as pleasing and balanced a picture as you're going to get. Square Enix already nailed the color balance in the game. It doesn't need to be tweaked much at all. You are far more likely to over or under saturate certain color gamuts than make an improvement.

This comes down to the old 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should' rule.
 
Seanspeed said:
Yea, I mean, you used a profile that obviously highly emphasized blues and took screenshots on a scene that is predominantly blue in the first place. Nothing good was going to come of that! lol

Frankly, from what I've seen, a very slight use of Vibrance for a tad extra color saturation, combined with the inherent sharpness improvements of a 4k downsample provide about as pleasing and balanced a picture as you're going to get. Square Enix already nailed the color balance in the game. It doesn't need to be tweaked much at all. You are far more likely to over or under saturate certain color gamuts than make an improvement.

This comes down to the old 'just because you can, doesn't mean you should' rule.
Click to expand...

The game looked bloody awful in those SFX shots, too bad I realised after posting them:p

This works a lot better, adds a bit of vibrance and gets rid of the slight "washiness" of vanilla without looking like Saturday Night Fever (carries a bit of a performance hit though, so I'll probably stick with vanilla in the end):

34peznp.jpg


apih5u.jpg

25q4oco.jpg

21axt9u.jpg

144a5ty.jpg

vp9ri0.jpg

2ngwq5l.jpg


These shots still don't do FXIII justice, it looks a lot better in motion. It's simply a very pleasant game to look at and has aged tremendously well.
 
Amatsubu said:
The game looked bloody awful in those SFX shots, too bad I realised after posting them:p

This works a lot better, adds a bit of vibrance and gets rid of the slight "washiness" of vanilla without looking like Saturday Night Fever (carries a bit of a performance hit though, so I'll probably stick with vanilla in the end):


These shots still don't do FXIII justice, it looks a lot better in motion. It's simply a very pleasant game to look at and has aged tremendously well.
Click to expand...
Yea, those look great. And the game looks damn next-gen at times, definitely.

Far Cry 4

sC7b.jpg
 
shamus21 said:
What's the game engine being used on star wars battle front.
Click to expand...

Frostbite 3. The lighting is a bit excessive on the Drop Zone map but otherwise it looks great. The explosions in particular are very Star Warsy - lots of sparks flying etc. Shame the game is a bit ****.

Outlast:

7FE13DB1FF84CF9EFD751EB05BDDA9ABAAE8AB7F


E2243818E8D0E8797B3C8870BA0C1540DF32AED8


Skyrim:

271615E6FB2ADBD6BA3D761A40C6CDB5C92FA3B6


018308B89701AC2CAF2F3FD2848F3FEA2AB59609


5E83C9DF0B9104941B7E3572802C3C2A4F789E3F
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom