Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mganz121

Live weather vs Active Sky 2012 vs Opus weather

17 posts in this topic

Over the past few weeks there has been a lot of debate about weather reproduction in FSX through either REX, Active Sky 2012 and Opus. I do not use REX (apart from the textures used with both engines), so cannot comment.

 

But I do use Opus for low and slow and Active Sky 2012 for fast and high due to the availability of winds aloft data. I thought I would post this in the FSX forum as I am not promoting one or the other, but thought I would leave it to the reader to form their own opinions of what is suitable for them in FSX. First up is a real life picture taken last evening from my home just to the north of my local airport and looking to the north west with a cloud front moving in.

 

 

The following picture was taken within FSX using Opus weather again looking to the north west.

 

 

This last picture was taken within FSX using Active Sky 2012, again looking towards the north west.

 

 

As I said, I use both. But I know which one I prefer.

Edited by firehawk44
Images removed as all exceeded 1600W and 400KB limits. Repost with proper sizes.
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

OPUS looks more like the real thing.

 

Cheers

 

Sure does! Looks great.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this comparing pictures.

I'm currently running Active Sky, but the Opus picture sure looks way better. Now I consider buying Opus, too, at least for GA tours.

 

Regards,

Flo

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First up is a real life picture taken last evening from my home just to the north of my local airport

 

LOL when I was first looking at that one (hadn't read the above line) I just focused on the sky and was like... "wow not too bad..." :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to bust a bubble but no matter WHICH one looked "more like the real thing" - it would have been a fluke. Now if one were completely clear or completely covered - then something is amiss but both pictures display the proper cloud coverage. The actual placement of the clouds is luck. if the metar calls for 6/8 cloud coverage, then that is what you should get, whether it looks like a picture at the exact moment is coincidence.

 

Both products are quite good.

 

It is extremely difficult to make any comparisons with one exception - does the product depict the metar correctly re winds, cloud coverage, visibility, etc. As to which you think LOOKS better - that is a completely personal thing mainly dependent upon graphics. What *I* think looks real and what you think are two completely subjective viewpoints and we BOTH are correct - for us.

 

For someone to buy EITHER product because someone else thinks it LOOKS better doesn't make much sense - it's how it looks to YOU that matters.

 

Just MHO,

 

Vic

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I notice wth OPUS clouds are they tend to use long banding clouds on the lower levels, where ASE/AS2012 tend to use smaller puffy clouds low with the longer banding ones higher up. (As seen in these shots)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just coincidence that there's a 10 frame difference between the two?

19.9 and 20.2

10fps? think you might need to have your eyes looked at B) :excl:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL when I was first looking at that one (hadn't read the above line) I just focused on the sky and was like... "wow not too bad..." :lol:

I thought that too, at first. :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that too, at first. :rolleyes:

 

Mother Nature's framerates are great too!

 

BTW, if anyone wants to have some fun - load up AS2012 and go find hurricane Sandy and fly (if you can) around in it. Great stuff - especially if you are safe at home.

 

Vic

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use both and I'll give you my honest opinion:

 

As it stands today Active Sky in addition to the weather engine has a lot of useful things that OpusFSX does not currently have, such as Maps, Met/Reps, Weather finder, etc., all in a single application

which can run on a Network client. No need to give a review on this software since most users (and there are many) know its pros and cons.

 

OpusFSX has a weather generating engine with regular real weather data from NOOA. I am very impressed with the quality of the output the like of which I have never experienced

on any of the sim versions, so in this respect it is tops for me. There is one thing I don't like, and it is not having any weather effects until they are activated by creating one or more camera views

and enabling DHM; would expect effects to emanate from the weather engine automatically. What this means for me is that at the moment I cannot use the OpusFSX just for the weather, without

messing around with camera views, which I feel should be a separate module. My set up comprises one server and one client, and so far the weather engine has not had any noticeable effect on

my FPs, also when weather changes the transition is super smooth something to be very grateful for, but having been a devotee of "FSX only" on the Server PC I feel uneasy but that's just me

breaking a Taboo. Nail%20Biting.gif

 

Understand these are early days for the Opus Team and that they have many changes on the pipeline, including a version that will run on a client. So although not happy about the weather effects being separate from engine I intend to continue using it and will wait and see what the future brings from this team. As regards Cameras & Live Views, you have probably gathered I don't care much about them,

but if the effects and quality are as good as the weather generation then I'm sure those of you who are interested in this area won't have any reason to complain.

 

Also own a registered version of REX. Did test the weather engine a few times but found ASE to be much better and since only use for the textures.

 

regards

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this means for me is that at the moment I cannot use the OpusFSX just for the weather, without

messing around with camera views, which I feel should be a separate module.

 

That is one thing I am still scratching my head about... :blink:

 

Reminds me (and if anyone accuses me of not kidding and saying something bad about Opus, I'll be so :t0105: ) reminds me of the SNL sketch about "Shimmer"...

 

"New Shimmer is a floor wax AND a dessert topping!" (hulu)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you can use OPUS without using LiveCamera. Just use it for the weather, and don't enable the camera stuff. It's easy.

 

I also use Opus and like it a lot. Never used AS, so can't compare. Don't like REX weather. But I agree with Vic who quite correctly warns against deciding based on mirroring some small slice of the sky in an actual photo. No program will do that except by accident. What it needs to get right is the ratio of sky coverage and the layers and kinds of clouds.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an automatic message.

 

This topic has been moved from "MS FSX Forum" to "The OpusFSX Forum". This move has been done for a number of possible reasons.

  • The most likely reason is that the post was off topic.
  • The topic could also have contained images or a video that were not appropriate to the original forum it was posted in.
  • The images might not have been "illustrative" or "explanatory" in nature.
  • The topic could have been moved because we deemed it to be more appropriately placed elsewhere.

Please ensure that your posts are "on topic" and contain illustrative images or videos as appropriate. Do not post videos or images just for entertainment purposes anywhere but in the screen shot or video forums.

 

Members who continue to post off topic posts can be denied entry to specific forums in order to reduce and remove the practice. Your cooperation is appreciated.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0