Mixture ... Switzerland and Austria (in the full view of the pictures - see the picasaweb album - you can easily read the coordinates in the top left).

@alpilotx

 

@tony

 

 

Yeah you guys are right that is Europe. Lovely.

Very cool - mind you V3 is not too shabby either - see these shots near the Matterhorn

 

http://1drv.ms/1J7r8AT

Bella Coola

 

 

 

Bella Coola

 

Love the Sky, and not bad scenery too ;-)

Love the Sky, and not bad scenery too ;-)

 

 

V3 .  Love the dawn and evening sky in XPX.  I am using Realistic Sky from .org

Th link to the PREVIEW shots has changed (and i can't edit the first post anymore):

• https://picasaweb.google.com/101666907909842492197/PREVIEWUHDMeshSceneryV1

PS: and the upload of the final files has started ... so they might be released shortly (depends on how fast the hosters can ready the files).

 

 

Th link to the PREVIEW shots has changed (and i can't edit the first post anymore):
https://picasaweb.go...HDMeshSceneryV1

 

I've updated the link for you in post 1

 

Looking forward to trying these out, if my aging computer can handle them :smile:

Oh man, this should be great.

 

Hope my desktop and laptop can handle it.

 

Now we need ground textures. Yes @Tony many areas in XPX the ground textures look very bad e.g. CYBA i just noticed it.

Now we need ground textures. Yes @Tony many areas in XPX the ground textures look very bad e.g. CYBA i just noticed it.

I think, you need to be more specific ... What are "bad looking" textures? What would be "good looking" textures? Are you really meaning textures? Maybe its something different, you do not see in the right context? Maybe its data? maybe something else ? ...

 

And for textures ... you might just grab g2xpl and do some phototexturing yourself (thats what that tool was meant for) ...

I think, you need to be more specific ... What are "bad looking" textures? What would be "good looking" textures? Are you really meaning textures? Maybe its something different, you do not see in the right context? Maybe its data? maybe something else ? ...

 

And for textures ... you might just grab g2xpl and do some phototexturing yourself (thats what that tool was meant for) ...

 

I meant the ground textures , like the plains. It looks way too grainy.  as an e.g. CYBA look at the flat ground. Somehow the Mountains look very nice . 

 

I would have grabbed g2xpl but I don't have the bandwidth or hdd space for that.  I can use FSset based FS9 photo scenery which I have used with V2 but I am not sure if they shall work with V3. Though  I can only use 1m resolution but it does not look too bad.

 

And I fly mostly in Canada / Alaska and the satellite coverage for those areas are bad.  The other thing is the clouds which show up as a white patch which I hate as it just kills the experience.

 

I know these textures are XPX default and V3 has nothing got to do with them.

I know these textures are XPX default and V3 has nothing got to do with them.

Yes, thats correct ... but I am also in very close (and good - well, we are friends some way) contact with they guy who worked on all the ground textures (as we did the base work - and the base scenery - for XP10 together). Thus I know very well (even if I did not do the artistic part of the work .... but had lot of discussions etc.) how complex it is to make things look the way they look now (the result of many years of work) ... And of course they could be improved (there is nothing, which can not be improved), but I know from the previous experience, that this wouldn't be something anyone would do overnight B) (or simply put: creating adequate, good looking ground textures is a hell of a work).

 

And by the way: "dull" planes are the hardest to make look right with the landclass based texture approach ... the main problem there is, that there is almost nothing on the data side, which would result in some halfway decent versatility. Almost not elevation changes (which we always use to "induce" some terrain change) and even the landclass can be the same for miles and miles (or only a variation between grass / agriculture / grass / agriculture etc.) ... so there is not much which we can - magically - turn into something interesting (and we already do some tricks - like texture swizzling vis shaders - to not make it look even worse).

 

By the way ... I dare to say, that Banff is maybe not the "worst" area in the sim:

 

Google Earth:

HD Mesh Scenery v3:

 

... but we go a bit off topic

@alipolitx

 

 Yes we are off topic .

 

 Yes it would be very difficult to get those textures without any data but maybe just editing the existing textures for a HD quality thing maybe that could work.

 

Go down on the ground not the sat view.

 

 Awaiting UHD.

 Yes it would be very difficult to get those textures without any data but maybe just editing the existing textures for a HD quality thing maybe that could work.

Did you also read the first part of my post (not just the two screenshots - I know, they are "distracting" from the text)? What I wrote about the complexities included in creating appropriate ground textures? Believe me, to make them work well in this landclass based approach, they need to be much more than just plain, rectangular images ... So yes, of course it could be done, but i say: its time 8and nerves) consuming task, which wouldn't be done over a weekend ... (if you want it still look halfway good afterwards).

@alpilotx

 

Yes captain i did loud n clear.