I just saw on Simmarket the REX has made Soft Clouds for FS9. This is a nice surprise for me because I have and like all the FS9 stuff REX has made, and thought they were done with FS9 a long time ago.

I keep scratching my head why so many people bother with FSX/P3D over FS9. Great to see some developers aware there is still a FS9 market and you know, it might even be an ever so slightly growing market! lol 

I just bought it from REX but they have failed to provide a link to the downloadable.  Great products, but their customer service is the most convoluted thing imaginable.  Why should I have to go and post my problem on their forum to get an answer?  Just answer the friggin' email.

Tim came through after all.   :smile:

I just bought it from REX but they have failed to provide a link to the downloadable.  Great products, but their customer service is the most convoluted thing imaginable.  Why should I have to go and post my problem on their forum to get an answer?  Just answer the friggin' email.

 

We had a gliche with our store today.  We have corrected it, but I will need to provide you with a direct link.  Please email me at: [email protected]

Seems  that your  the only  one  who is  having  this issue might  pay you to visit the rex  forum to post your issue

so no harm in posting  your issue  in the correct  forum being  the rex  forum  which you will get  your  anwser

I believe the attraction is the clouds are "semi-volumetric".

I'd like to hear from users what that exactly means to them.

 

Normally I'd just buy the product, steeped as one is in the joy of an FS9 release.

But I have a great deal of work invested in my clouds, and am actually very happy...

Why would they be 'softer' then fs9 default which is the same resolution?

 

My opinion for some time is its nothing more then a clever marketing ploy to 'sucker' FSX and p3d users who had a misguided belief that 4096 sized clouds would be the most realistic. Instead they've all been suckered to buy 'soft' clouds which are no more then fs9 default sized and looking.

 

 

 

There. I said it.

I use REX Environment Xtreme  2004 and they have always given the best rendition in clouds.  They have always looked ethereal to view...and every time I take a heavy up through them....out escapes...an Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....now THOSE are clouds....depth, color, all of it...welcome home....

 

Mitch

Why would they be 'softer' then fs9 default which is the same resolution?

 

My opinion for some time is its nothing more then a clever marketing ploy to 'sucker' FSX and p3d users who had a misguided belief that 4096 sized clouds would be the most realistic. Instead they've all been suckered to buy 'soft' clouds which are no more then fs9 default sized and looking.

 

 

 

There. I said it.

Jon, designing my clouds for Evo I also realised that hi-res clouds usually mean hard-edged clouds. Looks great on screenshots but for me the feel isn't right flying through them. 32 bits is good as the alpha alyers can be finely structured for a soft look from close-up. With lower resolutions soft edges start looking pixelish. I finally settled for a larger texture size in a lower resolution as the best compromise between structural definition and soft loks.

 

I wonder how volumetric clouds could work with the fs9 though as the clouds are displaying as billboards.

When this "soft cloud" thing first came out for FSX awhile back (I'm FS2004 ONLY user  .... FSX mentioned only for timeline purposes), I was using Hi-Def clouds.  I decided to go back to Flight Environment (FE) and see what I had replaced.

Lo and behold ..... soft clouds which were much more "realistic" looking.

Sometimes "new" is really just "old" revisited.

I may well be a guilty party in all of this.  

 

When Rex released "Soft Clouds" for P3D and FSX I chose to be a denier and posted a screenshot (P3D forum) showing the use of default clouds in FS9 as an example of truly soft clouds. I believe, if memory serves me correctly, I may have even had the temerity to refer to (the alleged) comment by P.T.Barnum :- 'There's a sucker born every minute.' 

 

Jon_aus was kind enough to compliment me for the screenshot and I was surprised, and delighted, to learn subsequently through his posts that he had converted to default clouds also.  First impressions count and I note Jon is not convinced Rex is demonstrably better.  I realise it is early days yet, however I can't help to be reminded of another homily ... 'A fool and his money are soon parted.'

 

I would wait a little until trusted feedback is posted here before rushing out to buy something which may not be needed.

HI Folks,

 

While I find it commendable that a vendor shows FS9 some consideration - I've been extremely happy with FE and haven't found anything better - obviously according to my tastes... I've always been of the opinion that the REX clouds seem way too hard with clearly defined edges that made them look unnatural - so "Soft Clouds" might be a step in the right direction...

 

Regards,

Scott

I also would be interested to try default clouds. But. How do you convert them to 256*256 while maintaining 32 bit? I manage to change them to 256 but at the same time they are 24 bit. Any advice is appreciated.

I also would be interested to try default clouds. But. How do you convert them to 256*256 while maintaining 32 bit? I manage to change them to 256 but at the same time they are 24 bit. Any advice is appreciated.

Did you use dxtbmp for this? You need to open the file with dxtbmp first, then send it to the editor of your choice. Reduce size, save the file in the editor, refresh in dxtbmp and save it again. The original format will be preserved. You can also use save as option to select 32bit.

 

You can get dxtbmp here https://flyawaysimulation.com/downloads/files/2883/dxtbmp-dxt-extended-bitmap-editor/ or any other number of sites.

 

Cheers,

Sascha