I just did a full clean install of fsx, (long story) anyways I forgot how good the default clouds looked, they are really soft looking, excellent for ovc conditions, even flying into them seems to be  more realistic, 

 

 

I forgot how good the default clouds looked, they are really soft looking, excellent for ovc conditions, even flying into them seems to be  more realistic, 

 

I agree with you to a certain extent as some of those HD cloud sets I see people post screen shots just look horrible and out of place to me. For one, I never see clouds in real life that look like some of the HD sets, especially with some of the over baked cloud shadows in them. They almost look like the were photo shopped in the screen shot and dont really belong there.

 

However I am not fond of the defaults either, but I do like the slightly softer look.

 

I've actually found some of the best results by using some of the FEX clouds and using their built in cloud builder to model my own. Using that I can adjust the shadowing, brightness and softening to my liking. On top of that I usually use then in either 512 or 1024 DXT format. By using a lower res set it not only helps performance but also helps to soften them a bit.

 

Or, i'll install an REX or FEX set and just use lower res versions to help soften them a bit. Nothing worse than clouds so sharp looking that you could slice meat with them.

 

On top of that, i've tried just about every payware sky set from REX and FEX and still come back to what I would consider still the most realistic sky set I have found by using the recompiled for FSX HDEv2 set. Not to mention its freeware as well.

 

A tip also if you like the default clouds, you can google and try the freeware Oscar clouds. They are similar looking to the defaults but with a little enhancement, or try the HDEv2 clouds that come in the FS9 package but work fine in FSX as well. Personally I tried the Oscar clouds and didn't care for them, but the freeware HDEv2 clouds look pretty nice as well.

 

 

but the freeware HDEv2 clouds look pretty nice as well.

 

I'll check them out to, thanks for that

I'm with you there. Default clouds rule. I never was convinced to buy a cloud texture addon as, each time I look at a screenshot with some,I feel them cartoonish, fake, specially at 4096. And I may add than a good weather engine  really showcases them as FSX stinks here (I've Opus).

Rex and P3DV2 seem to be getting it right:

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/431963-rex4-p3dv2-perfection/

 

gb.

best thing is to use REX cloud BUT not at max resolution.... if you decrease to 1024 then you'll get a bit of blure and then it really looks real.

In REX4 I use 512 DXT, look great, soft close up. Light on fps

Like default clouds too, but I wish they were better optimized.

 

 

On top of that, i've tried just about every payware sky set from REX and FEX and still come back to what I would consider still the most realistic sky set I have found by using the recompiled for FSX HDEv2 set. Not to mention its freeware as well.

 

+1 Definitely the most realistic looking cloud set available.

What always puts my off default is the way that clouds conform to their altitude too much and appear far too layered.

What always puts my off default is the way that clouds conform to their altitude too much and appear far too layered.

 

Anybody having peeked through the tiny window of an airliner cannot be agree with you. But is it an issue with the clouds rendering or the weather engine ?

Anybody having peeked through the tiny window of an airliner cannot be agree with you. But is it an issue with the clouds rendering or the weather engine ?

 

Sorry I don't really understand the first part of your question.

How the clouds look by themselves is a graphic rendering issue, how they are organized in layers and in the layers pertains more to the weather engine IMO. I may be wrong though. 

How the clouds look by themselves is a graphic rendering issue, how they are organized in layers and in the layers pertains more to the weather engine IMO. I may be wrong though. 

 

Probably, my point is that with addon weather programs the issue of layering seems to vanish or at least be hidden much better than default.

Not entirely, I've never encountered cloudscapes in FS as seen in the skies, specially irregular developments of a layer in the vertical dimension.