Photoreal Recommendations?

[woodsonl 0]

Check out www.sim-savvy.com for Photoreal Scenery of the Western US. I am the vendor and hope to have it ready for sale by Nov 1st. Try the samples & send me some feedback

[michal 44]

I am sorry, but are you really saying that those pictures J van E posted of VFRGENX2 above are a joke ????

No, they aren't a JOKE, their are an honest effort at photographic scenery but they simply fall short when compared to FTX. My opinion of course. By the way your 'low level' approach (actually it is still quite high) and night-time examples again - look decent but simply not in the same league as FTX. The proper integration of 3D airport with surrounding scenery and full night airport scenery is the key issue for me when buying scenery.

[Guest]

LOL Well, it's all a matter of taste. You can't simply say one is better than the other, because it all depends on how you fly, what you like to do, etc. etc.! I know photoreal scenery has it's shortcomings (lot's of it: don't get me started!!!), but I simply like it more than generic textures with autogen on it. (I also own FTX, so I know what I am talking about, or better said: so I know what I like more myself. ;) )

I don't have this (yet!) but based on what I have seen in screenshots and what it features, this is the kind of photoscenery I am looking for, just wish it was more than an island, LOL.Alderney from Earth Simulationshttp://www.earthsimulations.com/information

I own Alderny, and it's great indeed. But 1. it's very small and 2. the 3D-buildings (not autogen: the island hardly has autogen, I think) still stick out too much... It IS the best thing you can buy when it comes to scenery like this, but it's just not real. You still see simple cardboard boxes on a flat surface when you fly low... There are no hedges, no flowers in the garden, no real shadows, etc. Of course I know that would be impossible with current hardware and FSX! But as long as things down low look fake (to me!) I rather stay high up in the air and see photoreal textures down there: to ME that looks as real as it gets! Well, when I am flying VFR, that is. When I am flying the MD-11, FSX seems to be a totally different game and I don't care too much about ground textures. Then the plane has my focus and things like taking off and landing. Which shows that it all depends on what you do in FSX. And you can do so much in FSX... I am very glad there is something nice to be found in and for FSX for everyone! There is no need to discuss it or to convert others: be happy with what you like! :)

[1mikel151 71]

Check out www.sim-savvy.com for Photoreal Scenery of the Western US. I am the vendor and hope to have it ready for sale by Nov 1st. Try the samples & send me some feedback

Thanks, d/ling a couple of samples now. In looking at your site, this is what stands out "These are 1 meter per pixel aerials resampled to 2.38 meters to keep the size down" while I understand wanting to keep the file size down, this really limits the quality in my mind.Also when looking at the states for sale there are no promo images that I can see.

[michal 44]

Also when looking at the states for sale there are no promo images that I can see.

Yeah, I too was looking for some images, gallery, etc. and could not find any.

[Guest ightenhill]

I am sorry, but are you really saying that those pictures J van E posted of VFRGENX2 above are a joke ???? That the colours are terrible ??? I thnk you need some new glasses!! :(

Whilst we can all have our opinion, I stick to my point.. At this particular height and any lower they look like oversaturated very slightly out of focus pictures (look at the full size though they are worse here than I remember possibly due to compression) draped over a very fine mesh (hold on , thats what they are) and these are good areas of this particular product.. They bear no resemblance to reality especially in colour (though other photo products do manage this much better I have to agree) lets not even mention seasons or the effects of daylight.. But lets just choose to disagree, what would be the point of forums otherwise ;) ..

[Guest]

"These are 1 meter per pixel aerials resampled to 2.38 meters to keep the size down

That's a no go for me. I rather have a smaller area that's looking great than a big area that's looking pixelated.

[Andydigital 93]

They bear no resemblance to reality whatsoever..

How can a photograph of something that exists in reality have no resemblance to reality :(

[oldbear 33]

Mark & JeroenYou better be right. I've just ordered VFR Gen X Southern England on the strength of your screenshots! Well, and some other research as well.... :( Ian

[Guest]

Mark & JeroenYou better be right. I've just ordered VFR Gen X Southern England on the strength of your screenshots! Well, and some other research as well.... :( Ian

I am glad you did some other research as well... :( :( As I said, there is more than enough wrong with VFR GenX or any photoreal addon, but fortunately those things don't bother me (seasonal textures ofr instance). I like it, even though it's not perfect.My shots were taken above Wales btw... that's not the volume you've ordered... B)

[Guest ightenhill]

How can a photograph of something that exists in reality have no resemblance to reality :(

Either your joking and trying to score a (very) cheap point or have a very odd idea of what has to be done to a these images before they can be used.. I am talking about the colour pallette that has been chosen on the UK stuff which has a rather poor saturation and colour curve choice (IMO) especially when compared with what other products have recently showed what can be done in thsi field..

[Andydigital 93]

If you had seen the source images Horizon had to work with back when the photo's were originally licensed you would be saying they did a fantastic job, the weather in the UK is bloody awful and it took a very long time to photograph the whole of England and Wales. Scotland still hasn't been finished photography wise many years later, so you can imagine what a momentous task it was for them.

[scott967 62]

There's advantages and limitations to any approach to doing terrain. If you had access to 6 cm photos and the season situation can be managed (based on location) you can get photos that look pretty good. Perfect? no, but what is?? I'm no artist but this is something I could do. Good enough? Guess that is for each user to decide. scott s..

[woodsonl 0]

Thanks, d/ling a couple of samples now. In looking at your site, this is what stands out "These are 1 meter per pixel aerials resampled to 2.38 meters to keep the size down" while I understand wanting to keep the file size down, this really limits the quality in my mind.Also when looking at the states for sale there are no promo images that I can see.

I will post screen shots soon. I suggest you wait for the full product because buying each state bumps the cost up to $650 total. It's a matter of the cost of the flash drives & USB drives used for delivery that makes it difficult for me to sell smaller pieces. I just wanted to get started & get feedback on the samples. The samples alone are 4 gig and make up about 25 cents worth of scenery (25,000 sq miles). Most freeware & many commercial photoreal titles are resampled to 4 meter resolution to work with older versions of MSFS. The 11 states will be about 150 gigs. Using 1 meter resolution would quadruple the size and slows the perfomance somewhat. My experience working with resolution has shown me that cutting the resolution in half is just slightly noticeable but going further is quite noticeable. I'm still able to load the entire set in about 4 minutes on my low end Dell with 4 megs of RAM which I highly recommend getting for good performance. I'm still finishing up New Mexico & Wyoming for my Nov 1st hopeful release & have had little time to enjoy flying the product myself. But I promise screen shots soon

[markturner 0]

Hi Woodson, in my opinion, if you are releasing product at less resolution and greater cost than existing stuff on the market, its not going to fly off the shelf. I looked at your site ( in fact there was a thread about it here a few months back ) and the overall impression was not great. Seriously, you need screenshots, more information and some better impression of professionalism. look at BlueskyScenery's site and his is freeware ! You will need to convince people of your product a lot harder before they part with cash if the site and set up does not look right. This is just some constructive feedback from a potential customer of yours.Having said that, if its any good, I will buy it, but I am not really interested in stuff that looks worse in detail than MegaScenery or Dreamscapes. I would suggest to keep the detail high and release less, do the states the others dont, such as Oregon and the west of Canada, where there is awesome scenery. Cheers, Mark