Archived

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

fsxkitty

High Altitude Scenery Rendering...

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

 

I'm new to XPX, and this has been bothering me...

 

747-400United_1_zpsf8bfee87.png

 

Is there any way to increase the distance for scenery rendering at high altitude? I've already got my "world detail distance" set to "very high".

 

Thanks

Share this post


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

Is there any way to increase the distance for scenery rendering at high altitude? I've already got my "world detail distance" set to "very high".

 

Hi fsxkitty, 

 

Unfortunately there is nothing you can do to get rid of the blur, this is something that will be addressed in the future by LR and hopefully in the next 10.30 update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi fsxkitty, 

 

Unfortunately there is nothing you can do to get rid of the blur, this is something that will be addressed in the future by LR and hopefully in the next 10.30 update.

 

Thanks Carlos.

 

Really hope they fix it soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, on Ben's recent interview I didn't read any mention to this getting fixed :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if LR doesn't fix this issue before XP11, I will retire XP10 and stay with FSX/P3D.  This issue is really embarrassing to still have in 2014 after so many updates.  My fsx setups looks so good and real, when I look out my window from home or at FL300 from my trips.....fsx is the clear winner.  XP10 still has many problems for a new sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a "bug" in XP10,it's just how it is,DSFs at this distnace are entirly NOT loaded.

Ben stated that they are looking into it,and they enhance that with loading more DSFs at the distnace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Is there any way to increase the distance for scenery rendering at high altitude?

 

The "Blurries" you are see at high altitudes are low resolution Earth Orbit Textures.

Since they are textures, You can improve them somewhat by increasing the texture detail option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say it's a "bugiture" or a "feabug"....  There's both of it in it....

 

It's a feature because it really prevents the simulation engine from becoming overwhelmed by scenery elements to process, given the approach X-plane 10 follows regarding how it calculates what is withing it's "range".

 

It's a bug because no one can find that it is anyway plausible, in the looks...

 

Probably we should better call it a LIMITATION....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a bug because no one can find that it is anyway plausible, in the looks...

 

On the other hand, a bug is something what was not intended ...

 

Probably we should better call it a LIMITATION....

 

Difficult to find the correct wording :P, but this one is not this bad ... We should start a further discussion with finickiness :lol:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a 3 years old post on Ben Supnik blog:

 

"In the long term, we need to load more DSFs, probably twelve instead of six. X-Plane 10 already has some improvements in how scenery shift is done, but my guess is that we can’t productize this until we have a 64-bit build (since more DSFs chew more memory), so I expect this to happen in a patch."

 

( http://developer.x-plane.com/2011/01/100-mile-visibility/ )

 

Now that they've gone 64 bits, and since they certainly know this is one of the most frequent complaints about X-Plane, IMHO this should be now quite high on their priority list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that they've gone 64 bits, and since they certainly know this is one of the most frequent complaints about X-Plane, IMHO this should be now quite high on their priority list.

 

So, let's see what XP10.30 brings B). XP10.22 is around half a year behind us - what is a relatively long time in XP terms (10.25 was only a small update). Longer time means usually bigger steps - for obvious reasons ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fsx setups looks so good and real,

 

I bet you spent a few $$$ to make it look "so good and real". Did you manage to get rid of the pop-ups and blurries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bet you spent a few $$$ to make it look "so good and real". Did you manage to get rid of the pop-ups and blurries?

last time I had blurries was in FS9 5years ago.  My PC is fast and well setup...NO BLURRIES!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not start another s X-plane debate... Useless, as we all know... We use both because we like both... As useless as to parents discussing which of their children they prefer... :-)

 

And sometimes we prefer one of them, surely, when it's tantrum time..... :-)

 

But I agree the blurr is very annoying, and I also do not like the haze curtain effect, and it's still here too :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's just the way the X-Plane rendering engine works. In FSX/ESP, you have a dynamic level of detail - terrain textures and the elevation mesh have their resolution progressively reduced in the distance, so there's no jarring transition between different levels of detail.

 

X-Plane only has two levels of detail - "normal" high detail scenery and the low-res "orbital" textures. It does some blending at the edge between the two, but the transition is still quite jarring. This also impacts performance since there's no dynamic tessellation of the elevation mesh. 64-bit does allow them to render the high detail scenery farther away, but there would be a significant FPS hit. Another option would be to increase the resolution of the orbital textures, but this would use a lot of VRAM. What X-Plane really needs is dynamic LOD, but that's a major rewrite of the rendering engine - maybe in XP 11...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's just the way the X-Plane rendering engine works. In FSX/ESP, you have a dynamic level of detail - terrain textures and the elevation mesh have their resolution progressively reduced in the distance, so there's no jarring transition between different levels of detail.

 

X-Plane only has two levels of detail - "normal" high detail scenery and the low-res "orbital" textures. It does some blending at the edge between the two, but the transition is still quite jarring. This also impacts performance since there's no dynamic tessellation of the elevation mesh. 64-bit does allow them to render the high detail scenery farther away, but there would be a significant FPS hit. Another option would be to increase the resolution of the orbital textures, but this would use a lot of VRAM. What X-Plane really needs is dynamic LOD, but that's a major rewrite of the rendering engine - maybe in XP 11...

 

Very well put!!!!! Thanks for this observations, and how they really explain, so well, what is really happening, I believe...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


64-bit does allow them to render the high detail scenery farther away, but there would be a significant FPS hit.

 

Not sure about that. Usually you will see the distant scenery only from high alt and performance is not a problem at 20.000 feet or higher because all the expensive 3d stuff is invisible anyway. I get 70+ FPS at high alt...

 

Flo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will help a bit but it doesn't solve the problem only makes it a little less obvious and I had a hard time paying for this when I felt it should and eventually/hopefully will be addressed by LR...

 

http://secure.simmarket.com/taburet-xporbit-for-x-plane-10.phtml

 

This blurry rendering at high altitude has all but made me give up on XP10 for the moment, what makes it worse is how it will pirouette around your aircraft as you pan your head using Track IR.   I sure hope they have a fix before the release of the IXEG B732.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about FPS, but loading more DSFs would increase loading times quite significantly. When using orphophotos and OSM it already takes a long time to load up an area. It's something I'm happy to live with as I don't normally go up that high :-). But I can see it's annoying for people who do.  With FSX/P3D, it does look much better, but the blurries at high speeds defeat the point of doing so. I hope either way, they come up with a good solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites