Should the studio’s current plans for the series not pan out as expected, it is reportedly open to revisiting the fan-favorite. But Dice hasn’t completely eliminated a possible revival of Bad Company. According to GamesBeat, there is no truth to that rumor. The report also dispelled a popular rumor that Dice is currently developing a third entry in the Bad Company sub-series. ![]() It’s a safe bet that the game will come to PS4, Xbox One, and PC. Pixel 3 Battlefield 1 images are a fresh method to showcase your gaming skills. The Battlefield series spent three entries in the present - Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, and Battlefield: Hardline - before diving back into history with Battlefield 1.īattlefield’s closest competitor, Call of Duty, also returned to its roots in 2017 with Call of Duty: WWII, after devoting numerous entries to present and futuristic warfare.ĮA hasn’t confirmed the existence of Battlefield V yet, but it is expected to be revealed soon and will launch later in 2018. Still, it’s indicative of an ongoing change of course for two of the top first-person shooter franchises. to evaluate effectiveness include 3-D Laser Detection and Ranging (LADAR) imagery. Given the critical and commercial success of Battlefield 1, it’s not surprising EA appears to be sticking with historical shooters. A 2005 entry in the series was titled Battlefield 2.Ī commenter on Reddit pointed out that the “V” could be in reference to the “V for Victory” slogan that was used by Western Allies in World War II. Perhaps DICE didn’t want to confuse longtime players, though. Battlefield 1 transported players to World War I, so a game set in World War II could logically be named Battlefield 2. Internally, Battlefield V was known as “Battlefield 2.” That would’ve made sense and kept with the naming convention adopted in 2016. The reason for the game’s title is a bit of a mystery. Battlefield 1943, a multiplayer-only downloadable title for PS3 and Xbox 360, launched in 2009. This would end a nearly decade-long drought of Battlefield games set in World War II. By using a short exposure HDR+ avoids blowing out highlights, and by combining enough shots it reduces noise in the shadows. However, bracketing is not actually necessary one can use the same exposure time in every shot. ![]() This makes alignment hard, leading to ghosts, double images, and other artifacts. All our graphics are executed in vector, which allows you to change the resolution without loss of quality and edit easily. We create backgrounds on various topics: space, sky, cartoon, city, fantasy, etc. Unfortunately, bracketing causes parts of the long-exposure image to blow out and parts of the short-exposure image to be noisy. In our collection there are both horizontal and vertical backgrounds. "One solution is to capture a sequence of pictures with different exposure times (sometimes called bracketing), then align and blend the images together. ![]() "If exposure stays the same, then ISO must be the variable that changes slightly with each exposure" No, as they only combine "underexposed" frames. Furthermore Google often said that HDR+ only combines frames with the same(!) exposure, only underexposed frames. The Google Nexus 5x doesn't offer HDR+ dng files, so I had to test this with a modified Google camera app apk, which produced the same jpgs and exif data as the stock camera app. "the exposure time shown in Google Photos (if you press "i") is per-frame, not total time, which depends on the number of frames captured"įurthermore I have tested with the Google Nexus 5x that about the same highlights are blown out in the HDR+ dng file as when I capture a single(!) frame dng file with a third party app with the same exif exposure time and Iso. The exif data is related to the exposure time of a single frame, therefore it would be inconsistent to relate Iso to the total exposure time. Dereken, combining multiple frames doesn't affect Google's Iso number.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |