Same spot as the LSGS rwy 25 approach picture above now slewed to 12,000 MSL looking towards the left wingtip.

 

 

-Damien

Same spot as the LSGS rwy 25 approach picture above now slewed to 12,000 MSL looking towards the left wingtip.

 

Please be careful posting your images. This one slightly exceeds the 1600W limit for posting images on AVSIM. Thanks.

 

Best regards,

Jim

Please be careful posting your images. This one slightly exceeds the 1600W limit for posting images on AVSIM. Thanks.

 

Best regards,

Jim

 

I apologize, Jim. I've been posting the images to imgur so that when clicked they pop up to full size, yet don't take that much space on your server. I'll see what I can do to remedy this situation. I may just have to make the files smaller from now on.

 

In the mean time, I'm uploading the images to my imgur account. You can see the pictures at http://dfurtman.imgur.com/all/

 

-Damien

LSGS, Approach Rwy 25.

 

 

 

After taking a look at a lot of these, I'm starting to think I need GEX Europe and UTX Europe :lol:

 

-Damien

 

 

I did just that world FsGlobal Ultimate /GEX UTX, the combination is welll worth it. UTX must install on FSX folder.

 

But for smoothness try to install scenery on seperate drive from fsx and Windows.

 

In my case

 

c = Windows

d = fsx

e = FsGloablUltimate

 

Gex updates textures inside fsx so does need seprate drive.

 

Hard disk is a bottle neck in fsx if you got anything but OS on C and anything but FSX on D.

 

To avoid stutters, try to split stuff to seperate disks where possible.

Please be careful posting your images.

 

I didn't understand the the upload widget allows you to post "illegal" sizes. I think you have more cleaning to do in my first screenshot post found here:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/396396-as2012-took-my-breath-away/

 

Sorry about that!

I'll see what I can do to remedy this situation. I may just have to make the files smaller from now on.

 

You can send the photos to him by sending a PM too. I use MS Paint where I can select the size. Nice looking photos but we need to set a policy limit and 1600W and 400KB weight is currently the max.

 

Best regards,

Jim

That's basically what I'm already doing.. Windows on an SSD (C:\), FSX on a 2Tb HDD (D:\) and backups on an external 2TB HDD (E:\).

I did just that world FsGlobal Ultimate /GEX UTX, the combination is welll worth it. UTX must install on FSX folder.

 

But for smoothness try to install scenery on seperate drive from fsx and Windows.

 

In my case

 

c = Windows

d = fsx

e = FsGloablUltimate

 

Gex updates textures inside fsx so does need seprate drive.

 

Hard disk is a bottle neck in fsx if you got anything but OS on C and anything but FSX on D.

 

To avoid stutters, try to split stuff to seperate disks where possible.

 

That's basically what I'm already doing.. Windows on an SSD (C:\), FSX on a 2Tb HDD (D:\) defragged weekly and backups on an external 2TB HDD (E:\). I think that keeping FSX and my Scenery on the D:\ drive is fine as it's using an SLI cable to transfer data to the motherboard/processor instead of a USB2.0 cord..

 

-Damien

 

You can send the photos to him by sending a PM too. I use MS Paint where I can select the size. Nice looking photos but we need to set a policy limit and 1600W and 400KB weight is currently the max.

 

Best regards,

Jim

 

I understand.. I'm using gimp for photo sizing. I'll be more vigilant next time.

 

-Damien

That does look good. Hard to say from memory whether it's better than FSGenesis or not. It looks at least as good based on memory. I will say that. What about flying around the Norway airports I mentioned? ENBR or ENVA.

 

Check the earlier part of this thread, think page-1. There is a guy who has used both Fsgenesis and FsGlobal Ultimate, and confirms resolution and graphics on FsGlobal Ultimate is seperior. I have only used FsGlobal2010 and now Ultimate.

Check the earlier part of this thread, think page-1. There is a guy who has used both Fsgenesis and FsGlobal Ultimate, and confirms resolution and graphics on FsGlobal Ultimate is seperior. I have only used FsGlobal2010 and now Ultimate.

 

Sorry, but someone saying A looks better than B and offering no evidence to support their *OPINION* is by no means useful. A picture comparison is highly useful in this case.

I didn't understand the the upload widget allows you to post "illegal" sizes. I think you have more cleaning to do in my first screenshot post found here:

 

LOL! I don't moderate on that forum and it is done by other mods here but the photos all looked okay to me except for the last two. Just a friendly reminder of AVSIM's image policy.

 

Best regards,

Jim

Here's a shot w/FS Genesis Europe Nextmap sitting on Runway 25 @ LSGS

 

Check the earlier part of this thread, think page-1. There is a guy who has used both Fsgenesis and FsGlobal Ultimate, and confirms resolution and graphics on FsGlobal Ultimate is seperior. I have only used FsGlobal2010 and now Ultimate.

 

Trying to keep a distance (orange tag thingy!), but speaking as a customer who has purchased what's available, knowing what source material is available and having made mesh in the past..., there are no differences, at least for the western hemisphere, other than how a developer chooses to put the stuff together. Concessions are made, to accommodate the number of media. How the developer deals with the concessions is important to understand. If someone doesn't know what concessions have been made to fit a product onto "x" number of disks, they should ask the developer.

When I asked this question, I never would have thought it was so complicated. I'm really enjoying the screenshots and images though. Thanks for sharing your experiences with FS Global and FSGenesis. Its interesting to see the comparisons. There is an article in the Avsim reviews section that is a review on the FS Global Ultimate America's mesh...but no "compare and contrast" article between the two.

 

I'm pretty new to FSX, and don't pretend to understand all the ups & downs of resolution and such. But I'm learning alot by reading this.

 

If it is true that, if both products are based on the the same resolution of data that they will look the same. Is that a correct assumption? Or can one product still look better than the other even though they are based on data that is the same resolution?

 

If both products end up looking the same...maybe its how many errors there are in the product (Plateau'd airfields and such), how well those errors are "fixed", how often they occur, ease of installation and management, support, and price.

 

Sounds like for Price, FSGenesis wins hands-down with this 70% off deal. I'm curious about the other factors though.

 

With regards to performance. I've read several mentions of frame rate hits for high resolution mesh in this thread....but I've also read articles other places that say that terrain mesh shouldn't cause a FPS hit. Which is the correct answer? Will it affect your FPS?

 

And if it is the case that it will affect your FPS...is it possible to activate and deactivate the mesh at will so that...if you ARE having an FPS problem...you can easily de-activate the mesh if you need to or try to run it without the mesh.

With regards to performance. I've read several mentions of frame rate hits for high resolution mesh in this thread....but I've also read articles other places that say that terrain mesh shouldn't cause a FPS hit. Which is the correct answer? Will it affect your FPS?

 

I do not see any noticeable impact on FPS at all.

Quality mesh can impact performance, most noticable as mountains being "created" as you fly towards them.