Light version?

[guy 24]

Captains, we're setting something up for you. Hang tight.

Great news! Thanks!Thanks also to those who did the testing!A gain of 10 fps in VC and 15 fps in outside view is well worth it! Guy

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

Hello everybody :-) I tried to resize the vc textures like cmpbellsjc said, try it with gimp and dds plugin, the file it self resizes .... but when its saved its get the double rate off MB ???Overhead went from 2 MB to 4 MB or something like that, is that normal ? ok so far, copied the "new resized" files ito the .vc folder to give it a try ...... and its work´s nearly perfect, the only thing i cant understand is that the mainpanel.dds dosnt appear any more in fsx .... only thing i get is a black texture. but i "resized" it the same way like the oders and those were shown correctly ?! anybody an ida whats going wrong with the MB and the black main panel ?? Greetings from Germany :-)

Hi Julien,I ran into some problems myself doing the whole conversion using just GIMP with the .dds plug in, thats why I suggested manually extracting the texture and the alpha texture using GIMP, resizing those two parts seperately, then reloading the texture back into DXTBmp as well as the alpha channel, and resaving it as a DXT5 texture.I have a feeling that when you saved yours in GIMP you saved it as a .dds file, but I would wager that you saved it in 32bit compression rather than DXT5 compression which would indeed double or more than double the file size.On your VC these are the 4 textures and the sizes they need to be.PMDG_NGX_Main_Panel.dds to 2048 X 512PMDG_NGX_VC_03.dds to 1024 X 1024PMDG_NGX_VC_OVHD01.dds to 1024 X 1024PMDG_NGX_VC_Radios.dds to 1024 X 1024The Main Panel and the other panels are DXT1 with alpha channels and NO mipmaps. Again, I would be that when you did it using only GIMP, you somehow ruined the alpha textures and most likely didn't save it as DXT1 with alpha channels which can cause graphic problems. Hopefully you made a backup of your original textures as I have been suggesting and you can just start over. I would highley recommend that you download DXTBmp and make sure to always double check to make sure your treating the alpha channels the same as your treating the texture in regards to resizing it as well and saving everything as the original compression ie DXT5 or DXT1.

Hey Sean! I tried your suggestion. In fact, the perfomance increase was there, in my case I saw 5-10 fps increase (but not steady, I've got 15 ~ 25 variation on NGX VC now, before I had 12 ~ 16.).in external view, i saw a HUUUUGE increase: about 15 fps AT LEAST!In 2D I had a gain too, about 10 fps (don't know why!).

Glad to hear it worked out for you Gabriel!! I wish I could say that I picked up that kind of performance, but for me it mostly just smoothed it out and took a lot less time for the textures to load when switching views.

Sean,Thanks for the tips. Great improvement here as well. I resized the same textures as you except the VC as there were only 4 of them, and also unchecked highres VC in FSX settings. Now I can get 20-30 frames compared to 12-15. Much, much better. The only strange thing was, I had to go back to full screen to get the good performance. Before I did the resizing, windowed mode worked better. I'm happy now to be back in full screen anyway. :) Yes, it is time consuming and when using Gimp, it renames the textures so you have to pay attention so you can rename them back to the original file names. The good thing is, when you drag them into DXTBMP, the file stays highlighted so you know which ones you are working with. Finally got a short flight in from KPDX-KLAS and for the first time , the approach was bearable without serious stutters. Thanks again. :) Best regards, Jeff Moss

Good for you Jeff!! Yes in the VC I only did the four biggest textures as well, but I made a big difference for me. I have not tried unckecking highres VC in the FSX UI since I resized my VC textures, but I suppose you could save more overhead as well doing that. For me just running them in 1024 was enough and I still keep very crisp looking VC textures. I tried unchecking highres VC in the FSX UI when I was running the original textures but it made the lettering and text a little too blury for my taste.In any case I am glad your getting an improvement.

For those seeking "less" complex add-ons, search using Google and you will find options to suit your needs, I'm sure.Don't buy a Ferrari if you want a "Trabant".

This thread isn't about getting a less complex addon, it about getting less resource intensive textures for the interior and exterior. Running 1024 over 4096 sized textures isn't going to diminish the looks or complexity of the plane, it's only going to make it work better on systems that have less RAM and overhead to run larger texture. That's all, no one is asking for the plane to be simplified.Thanks for your concern however.Sean Campbell

[Fabri91 0]

Here, I posted some today. http://forum.avsim.n...-with-core2duo/ Sean Campbell

Thanks! It still looks quite good.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

Thanks! It still looks quite good.

Thanks Fabrizio. Yes, I dont think you can tell much difference in looks especially when compared to the performance increase.Sean Campbell

[madfred 5]

This thread isn't about getting a less complex addon, it about getting less resource intensive textures for the interior and exterior. Running 1024 over 4096 sized textures isn't going to diminish the looks or complexity of the plane, it's only going to make it work better on systems that have less RAM and overhead to run larger texture. That's all, no one is asking for the plane to be simplified. Thanks for your concern however. Sean Campbell

Hello Sean, Did you not read the original post of this thread? Actually, just read the title. Unless I misread the meaning of "Lite".It WAS posted regarding the complexity/detail. Through the posts made by everyone (very interresting material!) it changed to raising the performance by altering the texture size, which does not change the complexity/detail in any way. I am looking forward to see what PMDG comes up with as a result of this thread. I do appreciate any comstructive response to my posts. Thanks Sean, Manfred

[bpcw001 22]

Hello PMDG team, is there a light version of the model planned for one of the next releases? I know you guys are very good and you have proven it very well on programming and modeling the 737, but honestly in the simulator I don't care about anything behind the cockpit door.Or such things like serial number on the sliding window ... The systems are awesome, but there is way too much detail in the model for a simulation. Kind Regards,Patrick

No. It's just the right amount of detail, and that amount of detail is actually what makes the NGX so immersive. IMHO, PMDG did a darn good job on the NGX.Want a lighter model? Try different addon makers... Besides that, I doubt that by omitting that kind of detail you'd gain too many frames. I keep being surprised about people who ask addon developers to dumb things down instead of asking for more.Hardware is relatively cheap these days. Let the software move on to more realism.

[VARIG 0]

In my opinion, I think PMDG must give Sean the upcoming expansions for free, because he helped the community A LOT with this post.

[GSalden 4,651]

Just finished light textures for the vc textures and the exteriors for the 800 KLM and Transavia. I resized to max 2048 exterior ( not 1024 ) and 1024 for the vc.Also I resharpened all textures and on my setup with the 737 spread over 3 monitors and zoom of 4 I cannot tell the difference between this and the "heavier" textures before. Loading is faster and framerate is higher.

[JokersWild 34]

I'm having a problem. I got the nvidia plug in for photoshop. I can open the main panel but when I try to resave I get an error that says "image width and height must be a multiple of four". Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?

[VARIG 0]

I'm having a problem. I got the nvidia plug in for photoshop. I can open the main panel but when I try to resave I get an error that says "image width and height must be a multiple of four". Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?

When resizing in photoshop, make sure that the box Constrain Proportions is checked. then, resize to 1024

[JokersWild 34]

When resizing in photoshop, make sure that the box Constrain Proportions is checked. then, resize to 1024

Ok, I confirmed that the box is checked, but I still get the error.

[VARIG 0]

Ok, I confirmed that the box is checked, but I still get the error.

can you post a screen of the "image resize" box please?

[JokersWild 34]

can you post a screen of the "image resize" box please?

Sure. Give me a few minutes.

[JokersWild 34]

Ok, this is the dialog I get upon opening the file:http://i4.photobucke.../Untitled-1.jpg http://i4.photobucke.../Untitled-2.jpg The options I get at "save as"http://i4.photobucke.../Untitled-3.jpg I obviously don't know what I'm doing. They aren't displaying correctly. A step by step for noobs would be appreciated.

[cmpbellsjc 2,960]

In my opinion, I think PMDG must give Sean the upcoming expansions for free, because he helped the community A LOT with this post.

Hahah, ok... Hey, I just did my first round trip from Congonhas to Santo Dumont and then back to Congonhas. Did the 02R approach and flew it perfectly on my first try believe it or not. I saw some people at the guard house taking pictures as I was landing, lol. It was a lot of fun, probably the best approach and landing into that airport and 02R that I have ever made. Love this plane, now I just need some better scenery for Santos Sumont and Congonhas :-)Sean Campbell