Blurred base textures in FS9

[Guest murweb]

Having upgraded to FSX shortly after launch, I've since neglected FS9 but recently thought that I should return to it if only to get some use out of the numerous costly add-ons I acquired over the years and also to utilise the many tasty aircraft available for download in the Avsim library! (Many of these aircraft are not available for FSX). So I did a complete re-install, including FS9 update, and am horrified to note that although the aircraft, distant scenery and all autogen objects display clearly, the base land textures and especially roads, rivers etc are very blurred and the roadways and river courses are badly pixellated - see attached screenshot, taken shortly after take-off from Innsbruck, Austria.I have surfed the various flightsim sites and tried several detailed suggestions on how to get rid of this problem, to no avail. I've turned off n-Hancer, turned it back on and tinkered with its settings, fiddled with settings in nVidia control panel and within FS9 itself - even drastically reducing the level of all settings; have also adjusted, upon various recommendations, FS9.cfg - and stilll I'm pulling out lumps of hair in frustration (haven't got that much to spare anyway!).My system is pretty high-end, bought solely to cope with FSX: Asus P5 DH De-luxe m/board, Intel Core 2 Duo 6600 overclocked with Asus utility to 2.88 mhz, 4 gb of matched RAM; nVidia 8800 GTO GPU. This runs FSX perfectly at a steady 20 fps with all sliders maxed out and in FS9 delivers an average of 60 fps unrestricted, all settings at max (although I normally run it at a fixed 30 fps). The only problem is those awful base textures. It has got to be something so simple that I'm missing it, blinded by a mass of detail.(I also loaded into FS9 - FS Terrain 2004 and Reality Pack 1.2 by Sascha Rieger which includes replacement textures for many scenery objects - hence the 'different' appearance of the attached screenshot - but the problem persists with or without these).Any suggestions?Kind regards,Murray

[red1 0]

Ahh..I fail to see the problem with the screen shot? If you're referring to the ground textures in the front, I believe that how they are supposed to look like. I have used GEPro for many years now for those textures so they look a bit better, but again, I don't really see what is wrong.

[Macflyer 2]

Me neither! Unless someone else knows better, but I think FS9 is just like this. Most likely you're now spoiled by FSX resolution and textures.

[Guest belga1]

Hello,

but I think FS9 is just like this

Indeed .. at this altitude .. the terrain textures rendering in FS2004 is expected to be like in the OP picture.Regards.

[red1 0]

is FSX textures in that situation really that much better that a person would think there is a problem with fs9? I tried FSX for about a week a couple years ago and don't remember being in awe of textures.

[out 769]

But the ground texture resolution is the main difference between FS9 and FSX.In favour of FSX, forgot to mention. :( You are very low in the picture, so to me it also looks normal.

[clum 2]

while it isn't going to be as sharp as fsx i think it should be sharper than this. look at the distance textures. If you let me know the coordinates of the picture location and i'll try and post a comparison shot to see if my textures are any better there.

[red1 0]

It does look a bit more blurry then usual in the distance but again, I'm so used to using all my add-ons I dont really remember what fs9 looks like in default. :(

[Mike T 208]

Having upgraded to FSX shortly after launch, I've since neglected FS9 but recently thought that I should return to it if only to get some use out of the numerous costly add-ons I acquired over the years and also to utilise the many tasty aircraft available for download in the Avsim library! (Many of these aircraft are not available for FSX). So I did a complete re-install, including FS9 update, and am horrified to note that although the aircraft, distant scenery and all autogen objects display clearly, the base land textures and especially roads, rivers etc are very blurred and the roadways and river courses are badly pixellated - see attached screenshot, taken shortly after take-off from Innsbruck, Austria.I have surfed the various flightsim sites and tried several detailed suggestions on how to get rid of this problem, to no avail. I've turned off n-Hancer, turned it back on and tinkered with its settings, fiddled with settings in nVidia control panel and within FS9 itself - even drastically reducing the level of all settings; have also adjusted, upon various recommendations, FS9.cfg - and stilll I'm pulling out lumps of hair in frustration (haven't got that much to spare anyway!).My system is pretty high-end, bought solely to cope with FSX: Asus P5 DH De-luxe m/board, Intel Core 2 Duo 6600 overclocked with Asus utility to 2.88 mhz, 4 gb of matched RAM; nVidia 8800 GTO GPU. This runs FSX perfectly at a steady 20 fps with all sliders maxed out and in FS9 delivers an average of 60 fps unrestricted, all settings at max (although I normally run it at a fixed 30 fps). The only problem is those awful base textures. It has got to be something so simple that I'm missing it, blinded by a mass of detail.(I also loaded into FS9 - FS Terrain 2004 and Reality Pack 1.2 by Sascha Rieger which includes replacement textures for many scenery objects - hence the 'different' appearance of the attached screenshot - but the problem persists with or without these).Any suggestions?Kind regards,Murray

For those of you that think that this is the way FS9 is supposed to look, it's not and I hope that your sims don't look like this too! :( . This is a blurry mess from the foreground all the way to the horizon. Of course we are not talking 1m resolution like FSX, but not this sludgy mess either.1) Search for FS9.cfg tweaks for crisp textures by editing the 'TERRAIN' section.2) Update and /or fiddle with your video drivers (good luck)

[Guest murweb]

while it isn't going to be as sharp as fsx i think it should be sharper than this. look at the distance textures. If you let me know the coordinates of the picture location and i'll try and post a comparison shot to see if my textures are any better there.

Thanks, clum and a couple of others who agree that these textures are not as clear as they should be (after the first few posts I was about to slash my wrists but, hey, its only a game eh?)Clum, my position was appprox: N47 15.78' - E11 22.28' at appprox 2400 ft, heading 081 (on take-off from Innsbruck, Austria).The textures may look very different as I am using (as mentioned in original post) Reality Pack 1.2 which replaces many textures, including roads, railways etc. The poor quality of clarity is the same with these as with original FS9 textures. Look forward to seeing your comparison.Cheers, guysMurray,Aberdeen, Scotland

[clum 2]

Here's a couple from my FS9. Although you said your pic was around 2500ft, it was actually only about 200 because the elevation of LOWI is so high. After comparison I think that while you ahve a bit of blurring, the overall look of yours may be down to the poorer quality textures you use when compared with my GE Pro. Especially around the alps, all the textures get stretched a lot on cliff faces ect which can lead to a blurry effect. Have a look and see what you think.

[red1 0]

if that reality pack is that freeware available as freeware here in the library, I'd suggest you try GE Pro. I was that scenery pack and the first think i thought of, boy, that looks a bit pixellated, so that might be your problem. My sim looks like Clum's

[Guest murweb]

Here's a couple from my FS9. Although you said your pic was around 2500ft, it was actually only about 200 because the elevation of LOWI is so high. After comparison I think that while you ahve a bit of blurring, the overall look of yours may be down to the poorer quality textures you use when compared with my GE Pro. Especially around the alps, all the textures get stretched a lot on cliff faces ect which can lead to a blurry effect. Have a look and see what you think.

Hi again, clum. . . . and thanks for the quick response. Your point about the altitude is absolutely right, I had not reset my altimeter and should have realised anyway (well, I'm 72 y.o. and losing my marbles!).Interesting pictures; I note that your base land textures are much clearer than mine, although you have a fair amount of pixellation and aliaising on the watercourse and roads. So I guess that the problem is inherent in FS9. I hadn't noticed this when I last used it a couple of years ago but I guess the points made by some of the other posts are right - FSX is so much better, we forget how awful FS9 was for texture rendering. I was looking back with rose-tinted glasses. I shall persevere if only for the sake of all the super add-ons I have.However, I am impressed with the results you have from GE Pro and will probably get it (when am I going to stop spending money on Simming???).Have you tried Austria Professional X? It makes the same improvement to FSX as GE Pro appears to make in your FS9 pics. Very impressive - 2 shots attached, again on take-off from Innsbruck, for comparison with the previous screenshots.I'm going to close discussion on this subject from my end now; thanks to all who contributed.Kind regards to all,Murray