Hello simfriends

Yesterday, was a topic in Avsim, about best photosceneries with photoreal and autogen... the reason of this topic is to show one... is a free! photoreal scenerie of Canaria with some added airports (payware)

A few pictures here, to show the great interrest of photosceneries on specifical regions. Stones and volcanic'sands are very detailled...  but the same with landclasses (Try yourself in your sim) is very flat...we don't recognise the landscapes, the volcans seem to be only sand-mountains. Specific differences of each island disparate completely with sim-base or global scenery.

I uploaded large pictures...  Please, enlarge in your browser for better feeling.

Good flight

 

I too have the excellent freeware Canary Islands for FSX:SE. Unfortunately I have some freeware airports such as Tenerife South where the buildings disappear and reappear at random depending upon views/distance :( 

Often old 2004 textures that given problems.

Is the reason why I installed paywares.

thanks for your look on mine screenshots ;-)

Mark

If you like photoreal, you really should consider X-Plane with ortho4xp: setting it up can seem to be overwhelming (but really is not). The generated tiles you get for free (except your bandwidth) and no blurries whatsoever (one of the many reasons why I made the switch).

Note: I don't want to start a war which sim is best, I only want to suggest a mostly free alternative (except for the initial investment in the new platform. I do suggest to try out the x-plane demo first, to make sure your system can handle it).

Nice shots.  Land class based scenery will never be Photoreal, but it's way less in disk space.  With some clever use of blending with small area with Photoreal (e.g. ORBX) the net effect is pretty good simili, until performance issues show up with too much autogen etc.

Very nice screenshots - thank you for sharing those Marc.

Certainly photoreal scenery can look very good at altitude, but unless it is combined with autogen, I find the lack of trees and buildings reduces the sense of realism when flying at low levels, after take-off or during approach. Adding autogen to photoreal scenery can make it look very good but unfortunately it can also have an adverse impact on resource usage and performance.

Bill

26 minutes ago, Anxu00 said:

With some clever use of blending with small area with Photoreal (e.g. ORBX)

Yes, I was thinking about... why seneries for regions don't try to mix class and photos... Perhaps a way to the future, less consuming in disk space for some details increased by photos as volcans or typical grounds. Actualy it seem only airports sceneries use as orbx on lowi this kind of solution.

2 minutes ago, scianoir said:

I find the lack of trees and buildings reduces the sense of realism when flying at low levels

absolutely agree, here in Canarian's sceneries, La palma is with a good autogen.

in France, I like to fly vfr because sceneries exist with autogens on photoreal... I like too for the same reasons... Hawaii... La reunion... Etc.

1 hour ago, ms2 said:

in France, I like to fly vfr because sceneries exist with autogens on photoreal... I like too for the same reasons... Hawaii... La reunion... Etc.

If I lived in France or was very familiar with it I would be flying VFR because the France VFR scenery is awesome!

Bill

17 minutes ago, scianoir said:

or was very familiar with it

Hi Bill

Yes I'm 🙃 and I fly VFR a lot with Fvfr sceneries for this land.

For IFR mostly orbx sceneries over the world because high altitudes don't need ground real details... and ask less computer resources.

2 hours ago, ms2 said:

Yes I'm 🙃 and I fly VFR a lot with Fvfr sceneries for this land.

Hi Marc,

I used to do a lot of VFR flying in France in FS9 using FVFR scenery as it was the very best scenery available for any country in FS9 and far above the standard of anything else available. You are very lucky to have such excellent scenery available for your country in FSX now too!

Bill

7 hours ago, jh71 said:

If you like photoreal, you really should consider X-Plane with ortho4xp: setting it up can seem to be overwhelming (but really is not). The generated tiles you get for free (except your bandwidth) and no blurries whatsoever (one of the many reasons why I made the switch).

Note: I don't want to start a war which sim is best, I only want to suggest a mostly free alternative (except for the initial investment in the new platform. I do suggest to try out the x-plane demo first, to make sure your system can handle it).

Ditto here, in the Xplane forums I have a simple guide for installing and using Ortho4xp.  I've generated much of Arizona and California during the course of only four hours, using USA_2 as my source.  The end result is better than what MSE offers (which I have) for P3d, and it is free and takes less time to download than MSE.

Look in the screenshots forum for my results, I also have a youtube video posted, although youtube posted it at low res.  Ortho4xp makes Xplane a real addition to my P3d sim, especially when I want to fly hands on, VFR flight.

Also, I don't find the scenery flat looking at all, the mountains you show have depth for me.

John

4 hours ago, Cactus521 said:

Also, I don't find the scenery flat looking at all, the mountains you show have depth for me.

John, flat... Was speaking of landclasses aspect of textures of course...

4 hours ago, Cactus521 said:

If you like photoreal, you really should consider X-Plane with ortho4xp:

John, I agree when I have seeing your galery of photoreal in your country.

Before P3d, I haved XP10 on mine mac and was happy with too... but friends  using fsx and p3d asked me to join their groupflight...

I remember that in XP the usermind for "open source" is very present. 

Excellent images of the beautiful Canary Islands....love to fly there and Madeira after crossing the Sahara!

HLJAMES