There are ways to change it in mid-flight, but it has to reload unless you use an add-on or script it yourself. I'm not an expert in that, you'd be better off posing the question in the fsdeveloper.com forums or in a forum where this is a TileProxy thread specifically about TP (these are semi-dead, but I think a few are still barely active).

 

You can exclude LOD's, it is in the ProxyUser.cfg, I agree 60cm also looks good, but at 30cm I can fly pretty low.

 

One thing about TileProxy that helps, is you need to set a plane on auto-pilot with waypoints while you are away from the PC to download the scenery areas you need. You set the pattern in kind of circular fly-out search pattern (think many 8's connected like a slinky). Then it will have some of the scenery pre-cached, but Tileproxy seems it doesn't always pre-cache correctly either (sometimes). I never figured out why it does that, but I think it has something to do with it never having the full area in full res.

 

TileProxy will essentially continue to download endlessly until the area you are flying over has every texture downloaded at full res within the total LOD radius. I don't know what all it's capabilities are as far as mixing scenery like MSE 2 and TP, as I never tried it, but I assume it would need to reload when changing between them unless you somehow make an invisible layer or just use some LOD Stacking utility or something, not sure how to do it manually.

 

 

People could say I cherry picked the image,

 

You did cherry pick the MSE image, mine looks nothing like yours.  It's good that you enjoy TP, but your comparisons are far from accurate.

 

One reason I do video is to remove any questions about "Adjustments" in photoshop (or graphics editor of choice) or pause and wait for textures to load.  Video is much hard and more time consuming to "adjust", and I don't adjust my videos at all, other than making them fit on YouTube (compression with titles and basic scene transitions).  Heck, I even leave some "bad" aspect in there because I like to show "as is" so people get an appreciation of how it will really might look on their system (assuming similar configurations).

 

So are you the one that gave me a thumbs down on my MSE Nevada video?

 

It's great that you and others enjoy TP, but no need to setup invalid comparisons to MSE.  Let TP stand on it's own "as is", that'll encourage more interest.

Again, it is the closeness of the image, you are flying way too high. Again, try flying 500 feet AGL not 15,000+ and don't show such a distant horizontal perspective.

 

Videos flying that high and far prove nothing, it depends on the angle of the video to what distance you are viewing something at.

 

I am sorry, but I did not edit the Nevada image in any program other than labeling it in MS Paint, I took the image VERY quickly last night and did not have time to do any cherry picking. The reason I took that angle within MSE 2.x is because there were buildings behind me and so I had to completely reload the game/scenery to switch between TP and MSE, so I didn't mark my spot exactly as to where TileProxy had left off.

 

I will try to provide a better MSE 2 one, but I would have to fly much higher most likely.

 

I can include city shots, but then MSE 2 looks so far worse than TP in cities that it would be even a less fair comparison.

Give me Lat/Long, Alt and view angle, and I'll be happy to post some MSE images for you.

Let me get some coords and I will post them, but I think it's easier if people judge for themselves on their own machine by trying both products. I don't know what this is going to prove, that MSE 2 doesn't use mostly unedited USGS maps and charge $20-$40 per state slice (or $2000 for the US for something they get almost free)?

 

Perhaps, but seems that way.

 

Tileproxy at 60cm looks better than MSE 2 at 50cm, my settings are maxed out, I have spent countless hours optimizing my settings, unless somehow my higher settings are ruining MSE 2 (but it doesn't usually work that way).

 

I wanted to find a PhotoReal product to free me from the bounds of TP's slow loading and pre-caching flight requirements, but this isn't doing it for me. I didn't buy MSE 2 with the intent of bashing it, but that is what is happening because I really feel it is junk.

I don't know what this is going to prove, that MSE 2 doesn't use mostly unedited USGS maps and charge $20-$40 per state slice (or $2000 for the US for something they get almost free)?

 

So do you suggest that MSE devs should have paid for all the higher quality commercial data that Tileproxy uses? You would need to be very rich to do something like that. 

 

I think MSE developers have done very good work with the data that is available for them. 

No, I'd have suggested that they properly sampled the USGS maps in the first place and that they at least spent some time cleaning it up. Otherwise what did they do, they used a program to just compile the maps. You think their DEVS spent anytime on this, no they did not, they just let their PC sit there and compile the maps. Look at Hawaii, that's why it came out that way and then they tried to say "oh we are working on getting better images", yah really because you sampled it automatically and didn't look until the entire state was done so you said, hey we can still sell this for $5 while looking for better images.

 

Then I might have suggested that they use some re-mastering techniques and other tricks, as well as possibly getting a few higher quality aerial photos and re-sampling for at least some of the state. They are expensive, but they can get aerial photos of some places in some states especially Nevada which has an abundance of aerial photos available.

 

Orbx has some nice PhotoReal in some areas that is done properly, and they sell their regions even cheaper than MSE 2.x's state, and in many cases the Orbx area region is even larger, even though the PR area is overall smaller...

Tile proxy vs. MSE 2.x comparison screenshot below, you be the judge... In that video above you are flying very high and the screen is shrunk, it is hard to judge FSX by videos sometimes because videos have different AGL's.

 

IMO, MSE is doing nothing more than re-distributing un-edited US GS maps that are provided as freeware by the US Geological Survey. I don't think MSE even has any licensing costs for what they are selling. I do not mean to bash them, but unless people are pretty well-off money wise and not willing to compile it themselves, I don't believe most of you should be bothering with MSE 2.x.

 

On a 106" screen MSE 2 is unbareable to me if flying below 15,000 feet. In Tile Proxy I can fly at 500 feet AGL.

 

In this screen shot, I apologize that one image is in another perspective. I will post some other TP screenshots if people want to see more comparisons, but it's not even close.

 

I think many people that try Tile Proxy do not set it up correctly, it is not simple to setup. Tileproxy is the only time I've ever seen true photo-real looking graphics thus far in FSX... Well with the exception of the sparse Orbx photoreal areas, like Orbx @ Stewart airport, but the problem with Orbx Photo-real areas is they are blended into the repetitive forest / tree texturing and it doesn't always look right. Orbx weakest area is the autogen trees (but at the same time the fact Orbx has autogen is also nice at times), but autogen is too repetetive after a while.

 

Again, you be the judge...

 

MegaScenery Earth Nevada 2.x vs TileProxy

 

 

The TP screenshot above was taken while flying at 1,154 KIAS, it was cached from a previous flight of course.

 

People could say I cherry picked the image, but I didn't, if I compare "non-custom" random city areas in TP vs. MSE 2, then MSE 2 loses even more so. In any city that you don't have a scenery pack for, Tile Proxy still looks good at 500 AGL, MSE 2.x looks bad above cities even around 6000-10,0000 AGL.

 

IMO, MSE doesn't know how to correctly apply LOD sampling in their scenery, they are using a single unsampled LOD and because of that it looks bad. That is why MSE 2.x crushes buildings so extremely. All Photo-Real will give a slight crush/flat effect at times, but nothing as bad as MSE 2.x does.

 

I use a special lod exclusion technique in Tile Proxy to speed up rendering, and the key to acheiving these results in TP is the 30cm at 7.5 LOD radius with custom vertical lod exclusions.

 

 

Uhm yeah... I'm the first to criticize MSE but your shot there just isn't even close to being accurate.  Looks like you'll need to make some adjustments to your config or something, but it's waaaay off to what MSE can do.  Here's just a couple random shots from MSE somewhere in Washington.  And I don't even have the fastest build either...

I don't think it is my settings, you are flying above the hills pretty high. I noted some shots would probably look a little better because I didn't sit there and try to find the best shot nor was I flying high. However, those screenshots though a tiny bit better are still pretty rough.

 

Honestly, my intent was not to bash their product or make people feel bad that bought it, I was simply giving my opinion that on my 106" projector screen, it looks awful.

And I'm a little confused... if Tileproxy is so great, why are you spending money on an inferior product?  Why were you even interested in the first place seeing that you have awesome scenery in Tileproxy?  Seems like a waste of moolah.

I am trying to potentially get into building my own airports and sceneries and I have been studying different products on how they do things. If I am ever able to release my own, I will welcome the same harsh comparisons and criticisms so that I can figure out how to make it better. However, I doubt I would have done what MSE did and not at least try to add something custom to the maps (I mean anything, even some optional resample filters like TP does, even the FREE TP has some color filtering). MSE does nothing to the photos from what I can tell, and we all know MSE has had some decent sales, they have plenty of money to do SOMETHING (anything, I mean come on)...

 

Also, because TileProxy requires that you either pre-cache the data and that you repeat flights and since I use my PC for DEV + a lot of flying, I don't always feel like repeating flights. Also TP's load-times are inconsistent and sometimes MS / Bing maps seem to throttle your bandwidth after using them too much (but that is just one theory of mine, not sure). So TP works differently in different situations, it also isn't perfect, but I am just saying I cannot live with MSE 2 on a 106" screen. On an LCD monitor maybe when I am flying high.

I don't think it is my settings, you are flying above the hills pretty high.

Dude, you're flying as high or higher than I am in those shots. 

It's because that particular angle and what not, I agree the pic was worse than it could have been, not intentionally I just took it fast. In the MSE one I am flying lower than it looks like, I was about to crash into the ground and mountain.

 

I agree it wasn't the best comparison shot, I rushed it, but I took 3 screens and the other 2 looked even worse over the city with all the smushed buildings in MSE 2

Well ok then.  But as evidence from other MSE user screenshots, you gotta realize your settings are jacked or something.  The textures aren't even loading for you.  And if you think I'm biased towards MSE you'd be wrong.  Look at my Swiss threads. 

OK fair enough, but I thought it was right because from a very far distance the mountains looked fine. I will mess with again later, but let me see if I can get a clearer shot.

 

I am very very familiar with all the tweaks, and I have everything near max relatively speaking in the configs.

 

4096 textures, 7.5 LOD, all FSX sliders near or at max except autogen, and LD = off (Land Detail works ok I just don't particularly like it). Unless MSE 2 just fails with high settings (kind of doubt it).