From what I gather, the new method allows for more realistic representation (less spinning) of the clouds as you pass through them - at the expense of cloud spinning when panning your view.

 

Ah, ok. Well, I have to say I like the new method. I only notice spinning clouds when I take off my headphones while I have TrackIR enabled and look straight un into the sky or something. When I simply fly and look around, things look great! So I think I will stick with the new method.

 

 

but are rendered as multiple flat sheets [billboards]

 

So basically just a 2D surface ... is this different from how FSX does it?  I thought I recall seeing FSX actually building 3D polygon clouds and then apply textures -- think I saw this when I deleted the shaders folder and started FSX at an FSDT airport ... maybe I was mistaken and it was just a bunch of 2D surfaces?

 

Assuming the 2D clouds and view angle shifting is done for performance reasons?

 

Ok, ran a quick test in P3DV2 see here: 

  (YouTube seems to be having issues making this available in HD, but think it's good enough for this purpose).

 

I'm not seeing what your saying or was I just not able to pick the right view angle?  There are some odd effects when sun tries to partially shine thru the clouds (see 1:00 min mark) but I'm not seeing the swirling?  What do I need to do to replicate this so I can get a better understanding?

 

Cheers, Rob

Hi Novation,

 

In FSX, cloud sprites rotate around the camera (your field of view) as you pass through them, hence keeping them in view for a longer duration. In most instances the sprites actually disappear from view while in-cloud. This is the way it was designed unfortunately. The coders tried to overcome this by exposing specific angles between texture sprites and positioning them towards the field of view... while adjusting transparencies. The major drawback was in-cloud transparency issues.

 

In P3D2 the cloud system is built around the same sprite/billboard theory, and they do rotate, in a different way of course. They have coded to overcome most of the inherent issues of the previous system. It is indeed much more immersive than FSX, and actually feels like your flying through a volumetric entity rather than simply passing through a 'texture' sheet. My opinion of course!

 

All of this really depends on your style of flying. I actually spend most of my time INSIDE the cockpit, where these anomalies are at a minimum, except of course when I want to capture some outside imagery

It is very noticable. Just did a flight in mountains with low clouds/fog below me, and whenever I view to the sides the fog/clouds move over the landscape.

 

In one way I like the new cloud rendering - volumetric, and being able to fly through them in a more realistic fashion - on the other hand the old FSX way of doing things looks better when viewing from side to side.

I see the spinning clouds too but its when you  fly over them and then look out your window and look down at them. It became very apparent when using TrackIR. The texture seems to spin about an axis. 

 

Rather strangely X-plane 10 does this too and now P3D I don't care for the effect it breaks 3D perception very quickly.  

I see the spinning clouds too but its when you  fly over them and then look out your window and look down at them. It became very apparent when using TrackIR. The texture seems to spin about an axis. 

 

 

Exactly how I discovered it!

 

 

Rather strangely X-plane 10 does this too and now P3D

 

Hmmm ... will have to try again ... I did just ordered a TrackIR 5 Pro so I can test with that this weekend if that makes the problem more obvious.

 

 

All of this really depends on your style of flying. I actually spend most of my time INSIDE the cockpit, where these anomalies are at a minimum, except of course when I want to capture some outside imagery

 

I spend 99% of my time inside the cockpit; almost the only time I ever step outside is while I'm on the ground, and I find the effect quite annoying since I'm almost always scanning my view around, whether it be admiring scenery or looking for VFR landmarks.

 

If I only flew bigger stuff, it would probably be less of a concern.

I don't know guys, I am really into being immersed, and the enclosed video in this topic was pretty realistic to me ...frankly as long as it doesn't hit my performance I'm happy with what P3dv2 does....sorrrrryyyyyy

Hi Novation,

 

In FSX, cloud sprites rotate around the camera (your field of view) as you pass through them, hence keeping them in view for a longer duration. In most instances the sprites actually disappear from view while in-cloud. This is the way it was designed unfortunately. The coders tried to overcome this by exposing specific angles between texture sprites and positioning them towards the field of view... while adjusting transparencies. The major drawback was in-cloud transparency issues.

 

In P3D2 the cloud system is built around the same sprite/billboard theory, and they do rotate, in a different way of course. They have coded to overcome most of the inherent issues of the previous system. It is indeed much more immersive than FSX, and actually feels like your flying through a volumetric entity rather than simply passing through a 'texture' sheet. My opinion of course!

 

All of this really depends on your style of flying. I actually spend most of my time INSIDE the cockpit, where these anomalies are at a minimum, except of course when I want to capture some outside imagery

 

Well exactly my feeling Tim thanks for explaining lol all ok at your end of the planet?

Congrats on the pending release of Rex 4 texture direct great work ;-)

The varying responses prove that while you can't please everyone with a single setup, adding the option to change between what's default now and what was default with FSX, probably would please everyone. ^_^

Hi André

 

Things are going good here, thank you, hope all is well with you and yours. Although, I do need to take the wife on a vacation soon or I won't have a wife... hmmmmmmm??? LOL! Thanks for your kind words on the upcoming product!

 

Cheers.

The varying responses prove that while you can't please everyone with a single setup, adding the option to change between what's default now and what was default with FSX, probably would please everyone. ^_^

Hear, hear.

I'm sure there's an obvious explanation for this, but why do they insist on using the 2-d "billboard" method to give the illusion of 3-d? Why not actually make them 3-d? It's been a while since I played rise of flight, but from what I remember, the clouds in that game where truely well done. They even simulated moisture droplets on the windscreen while flying through them

 

 

I'm sure there's an obvious explanation for this, but why do they insist on using the 2-d "billboard" method to give the illusion of 3-d? Why not actually make them 3-d?

 

Performance maybe? The new volumetric fog can bring performance down on a medium spec system and I suppose real 3D volumetric clouds would bring fps down completely? Are the clouds in RoF really 3D?

From now is there any changes of the problem of "spinning clouds" or not?

for me it is really ugly and i stil try to find a solution for that.

 

thanks