so go there if you like it better. what is the purpose in continuously saying "bv is better" and still using a6?

ontopic:
all i would like is a fast shadow mode that supports models, blocks and terrain with unlimited dynamic lights and dynamic shadows. that's all. all the other effects are, in my eyes, gimmicks and i would turn them off in a game. but that's a personal opinion. plus, it doesn'tz really touch me because these are Post processing effects that likely require RTT. so not for the average comm-user.

I agree with you DaBro0zar. While I do think Bloom, blur, hdri ect would be
nice, they will look odd with the engines hard edged stencil shadows that
flicker on and off.

The quality of a 3D engines render, IS the quality of the engines light
and shadowing capabilities. I hope more attention is paid to develop better
lighting and especially shadows which are basic, than creating "realistic
water" or some other FX that are peripheral.

I have been watching the beta page for a long time, and there has been
incredible progress by the developers, so perhaps we will see all of these
things in the near future!

In the forecast you can see a new lighting, this is the next step.

I not need bloom for mornig but in my opinion the Shader & Effects Library can have, al last, bloom, and depth of field.

and understand your posture...

but I can be mistaken, but the mayor beneficiay to the bloom efect is the light and the shadows. If you look a sreenshot whit bloom you can see a beatiful rich brigt and constrast.
In my opinion a imagen whit hard edges and bloom is more stunig what a imagen whit soft shadows.

id still be happy if we had a simple depth buffer access . depth of field would be a benefit from that (and btw. easy to code it there was a working depthtexture). but better do this with an additional shader and give us the depthbuffer

plus i demand somewhat effect chain to use many postprocessing effects additional by using the result of the previous and not the base textur

I agree with you. Light and shadows make the engine look good at your screen shot. Lighting is the most important part. Even with missing shadows a good lighting can make it.

Because of that I like the soft shadows of level geometry in GS. I hope we get the same with models and the new adaptive binary tree.

Shaders are another option to go. A good shader (at least good Phong lighting) can make a picture better. A model without lighting looks flat. Only light and shadows can create an illusion of depth. Every painter knows that.

But I have a good feeling. All what I can read in the future section sounds fantastic and the new render kernel already works with stunning speed. But speed is only one issue. The artists need light and shadows. I cannot stress this enough. This is important and should not be left in the category of "medium priority" points.

Wrong lightning or missing shadows is somehow typical for many showcase 1 shots.

Many people debate long abount textureresolutions, but less about correct lightsetting in
a level.

yes. I agree. Even a bad textured level can look convincing with right lighting and shadows. But it does not work the other way around.

No, not just bloom for professional users. Personally I would like to see these and other effects created by Conitec in the commercial edition too. Think Conitec has cut enough in the commercial edition, Physics, Multiplayer and resource packer to name just a few!

All the best,

Dusty

Dusty: It might be that some post processing effects need render to texture (that is only available in Pro) and because of that we suggest those features for the pro edition.