Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

dtmicro

Screenshots - Orbx Uses Photo Scenery too

Recommended Posts

I created a new thread to post some Orbx screenshots to demonstrate Orbx's use of PR tech. If I have time, I may do a three-way comparison of some areas (Orbx vs. TP vs. MSE 2), but not right now. I am just focusing on Orbx screenshots at first.

 

Orbx is a strange breed in certain areas as they mix True PR, some PR, tiled PR (fake but real), and autogen together. Sometimes it works very well, and sometimes it does not. This is the starter post, but I will get some better ones as I come across them during flying. Let me grab some Stewart shots.

 

Here are some of the Good's and Bad's of Orbx Photo-Real:

 

GOOD (Missoula)

Blends in nicely overall and everything works together, grass texture is likely fake PR (generic tiles based on real photos though). Some of the city area around here appears to be REAL PR mixed with auto-gen, like the buildings. Some of it has to be real PR or tiled PR because I saw shots of cars in parking lots that were not rendered.

08pk.png

 

BAD

My textures weren't fully resolved in this shot (apologies), but it gives the general idea of the shot. Orbx needs to re-do the tree texturing they use on the left side. I see this same texture used in PNW and I do not like it. It is too abundant and it ruins many areas when flying low to mid-level. It looks OK in the very far distance, but close up it looks bad. The texture on the right (sand trees) is better, though that one appears to be PR tiles (fake PR derived from real PR). The black checkerboard texture Orbx uses in so many places HAS got to go, please!...

 

g7j5.png

 

Acceptable (not bad)

Here we have a shot kind of between the other two, I much prefer the sand-tree texture over the PNW tree texture, even though it is not perfect it maintains a more realistic and less-pixelated look. If only Orbx could spend more time on their tree texturing.

4ktu.png

 

There is some blockying of the textures because I am flying really low and fast, if I paused it they would clear up eventually, also flying in a relatively complex auto-gen area (Missoula).

 

Ok will post some more that is the start. Going to get some PURE Photo-Gen from Orbx next from Bozeman, Stewart, and maybe Alaska later.

 

Here is a shot near Bend, Or that is not true Photo-Real but looks very close to how that area really looks (I've driven all over the PNW area in real life and around Bend).

 

Good job Orbx for a NON-PR Shot looking like PR!

coql.png

Share this post


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

It is more for fun relating to comparing the best Orbx spots and figuring out where those are so we can fly them more often and enjoy the best scenery :)

 

Most people know it since they've used all the products, but the lurkers may not find it in a thread. When I was lurking in here after having only used PNW demo, I was not able to find any info about how the other areas looked, and Orbx screenshots did not do it justice IMO (their videos were better). I was NOT inclined to buy ORBX products because I did not think the PNW demo was so much greater than other stuff I had. The only reason I even tried Orbx was because of the Stewart airport videos, once I saw that I had to try it.

 

Orbx is pretty good though, people are missing out if they are judging a small demo area and expecting that is what Orbx has to offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried the ORBX Iceland demo, which is EVERYTHING they have to offer in one package.  Personally I miss the realism after a certain altitude, say 1000 ft.  The sense of takeoffs and landings is great due to the handplaced objects around cities and airports, and the excellent airports.  But then it soon becomes very monontonous.  Regardless how delicious the sense of flying is down low and landing/takeoffs, it gets old fairly quick - which is the negatives of landclass scenery.  It's not real, and the horizon soon gives you that feeling "I've seen that before..."

 

For that reason, I can't fly landclass.  Photorealism is where it's at.  Specifically, once you get down to the 60cm area, it begins to enhance that sense of speed and surrealness down low.  This is why I want Megascenery 3 (60cm/pixel) scenery.  If you get that with scenery that has been enhanced and equalized, you have it all.  You can always download add-on airports which will fit right on top of the photoscenery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See screenshots below for Orbx true Photo-Real where they actually used more pure PR techniques without much modifications... The best graphics Orbx has to offer is at their Stewart airport (I haven't seen Juneua yet though), but at least what I've seen so far. Too bad they cannot make the whole world look like this :)

 

fjmj.jpg

 

 

 

z8t3.jpg

 

 

46gr.jpg

 

 

5kx5.jpg

 

I take back what I said before about Stewart Airport not being 100% masterpiece, it definitely is. For some reason I had to reboot my comp as my textures were loading wrong before.

 

I flew all over the place the last couple days, and thus far I must say that the Stewart Airport in Canada still wins, but I don't own all their airports. There may be some New Zealand or Australia airports that can match it, but I have doubts.

 

Many of their airports are not worth the cost, but this one definitely is. I would venture to even say that the Stewart Airport is the best graphics ever made for FSX, most likely. The blending of auto-gen and true PR at this airport is nothing short of a miracle. When I flew into it in 3D, I got goose bumps and felt like I was really flying in Canada. The sharpness of the textures were even greater than those screenshots show, as the JPEG compression de-sharpens them somewhat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites