This is with real word weather, in Mobil, AL area. I had to reduce the clouds from 50% to 35% to run smooth, but they do look MUCH better. Have a look.

That's nice, I get this....still needs to be fixed.GlenEdit: After having watched your video, my clouds have always looked like that at that altitude, and with that amount of cloud. Try something if you would be so kind. Try flying at 20,000+ ft with good cloud cover and look down, and report what you see.Edit2: Wonder if it's the existing problem with ATI cards in Windows (with Xplane). Are you using ATI or Nvidia?

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by Muskoka

Glen, is that after the new RC1 update? Looks like Beta 10.

That's with the latest. Don't get me wrong, they look fantastic from below, or even slightly above. But when I'm in the CRJ200 at 31,000 they look like the screen shots I have posted.Glen

Glen:Have you considered that this might be a problem with your particular set-up? Several users have reported that clouds look much better along with screenshots and now a video. This is why filing bug reports is important, to alert the developers to anomalies like this.

MM, nothing wrong with my set-up. Chugs along at 30-40 fps with most settings near full, clouds at 40-50. Now could it be due to the current problem with ATI cards in Xplane, perhaps but I doubt it, because I didn't have the problem in Beta 7, does nobody listen, just a little scream there.Here's what I get before higher altitudes, 25,000+. (clouds were at 70+ in this shot)Can't get much better than that. Then once at altitude it looks like my other screenshots. To say once again, this DIDN'T happen in Beta 7, just every version since he messed with the clouds, or whatever it was he messed with.Glen

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by Muskoka

Did you try deleting prefs?

Yes, prefs deleted. Here's another shot from 30,000 and I circled the problem clouds. There doubled for some reason and look extremely flat.Glen

Glen, what percentage are your cloud puffs at?I just had a look at 20, 30, 40, 50Lower percentage cloud puffs gives you the 2D clouds at altitude. Higher cloud puffs gives you beta 7 clouds.

Glen, what percentage are your cloud puffs at?I just had a look at 20, 30, 40, 50Lower percentage cloud puffs gives you the 2D clouds at altitude. Higher cloud puffs gives you beta 7 clouds.

wich is because Austin coded the clouds like this: in the distance not much detail, near you: max detail (depending on your setting, of course). So my guess is, with 20.000ft or more between you and the cloud layer, it just draws the low detail - whatever the dimension you are looking at the clouds.http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/xplane-news/message/1649http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/xplane-news/message/1655

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by woweezowee

I'll post one from 30,000ft, and compare.

Goran, clouds were at 43 in that latest shot. Guys, even the clouds under the circle, which are a fair bit closer, don't look that good, kinda flat and fuzzy??

wich is because Austin coded the clouds like this: in the distance not much detail, near you: max detail (depending on your setting, of course). So my guess is, with 20.000ft or more between you and the cloud layer, it just draws the low detail - whatever the dimension you are looking at the clouds.

So, basically for the clouds to look good you can't fly at higher altitudes. Sure limits the kind of flying one can do, and have the really nice looking clouds. This wasn't apparent until after Beta 7, when you could adjust what you liked with respect to clouds. This move to a single slider baffles me. It hasn't accomplished anything other than to give poor visuals at high altitudes.Glen

Here you go, from about 30,000 ft. Again, I have my clouds set at 35%, and the still look pretty good.

The single sliders were probably an attempt to save us from ourselves in a manner of speaking. :( Many people will always put sliders all the way over then gripe when the fps fall of to less than minimum you hear that constantly in most of the forums.Of course the saving us part is tempered by getting some people of his back probably. Just saying, just a thought.

Here's a quote from a user over at the org, I'm not the only one seeing this.

Is it just me or is anyone else getting an intermediate cloud layer that looks like two identical relatively flat layers, one on top of the other that are slightly mis-aligned so that it looks like I am seeing double when I look a the clouds?

http://forums.x-plan...79Glen

Edited January 10, 201214 yr by Muskoka