23 hours ago, SaenchaySor said:

Example Moskow City (i try to make a pic one day) from DDesign. When i arrive there from a longhaul all the orbx terrain around the scenery is super crisp, with the whole elevation etc intact but the whole city of moskow (wich is all coming from the addon-scenery) is blurred. And this blurrieness behaves different as when orbx terrain has blurries. There, if one overflies or gets slower usually one can see that at least the sim tries to load more of the detail, but in this case this doesnt happen. It stays blurry and i can see no way that the sim even tries to load the rest of the detail levels.

You might be referencing a different issue.  PR scenery done by most 3rd party is pretty low quality resolution at lower LOD levels when compared to LC type of scenery tiles (AF2, XP11 Ortho4XP, P3D are all pretty low quality IMHO).  PR devs use lower LOD levels when making the scenery due to file sizes, each increase in LOD when making the scenery is an exponential growth in file size.  To leverage very "crisp" PR tiles the scenery dev would need to go up at least 2 LODs which would produce HUGE file sizes (for example lets take MSE's California ... it's around 100GB of PR data right now with no AG), if MSE have sufficient source resolution (sat or aerial imagery) and shift/increase the LOD by two levels, you'd have California weighing in at over 1TB of PR data.  Most computers couldn't handle that much PR data.

Another "possible" issue which I've brought up with LM, is that the LOD radius doesn't appear to be working well for PR.  LM insist it's the limitation imposed by scenery developers and not an LM problem.  Chris Bell was kind enough to provide me with a small 2 LOD increase scenery sample which was VERY impressive but I was unable to determine if the LOD radius problem with PR was still present or not due to the limited size/area and huge file size ... here is the video I made with Chris Bell's very small 2 LOD increase PR where you can see the transition from high quality PR to Orbx LC (keep in mind I'm using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10):

Unfortunately this wasn't enough "area" for me to see how well this worked over distances.  It's by far the best PR quality I've ever seen in a simulator but it's a very small area sample due to massive file sizes.

I still feel there might be a problem with LOD distances and PR, but until someone does PR over a larger area such that LOD comes into play (i.e. 2 LODS higher) that covers a larger area, I can't really positively identify a problem with PR.

So it's still "undecided" until a PR dev comes up with a good test sample.  And even if the Test Sample does work as expected and LM are correct, there is still the problem of file size which makes usage of such high LOD PR impractical ... I'd be ok with downloading 1TB of PR data as I have 1Gbps bandwidth into my home and I'm not sure how common that is?  There also the issue of housing the data on a server and bandwidth costs in providing the data.

Cheers, Rob.

1 hour ago, Rob Ainscough said:

still feel there might be a problem with LOD distances and PR, but until someone does PR over a larger area such that LOD comes into play (i.e. 2 LODS higher) that covers a larger area, I can't really positively identify a problem with PR.

I think there’s a problem with LOD and photoreal. I’ve got 10TB plus of orthoscenery, most in very high resolutions.

with 12,5cm per pixel, it’s sharp up close but blurry in the mid distance. It then looks a bit better in the far distance (likely because it’s further away).

when I say ‘mid distance’, I’m thinking half way down the runway when you’re approaching from one end. It just looks muddy.

i don’t recall v3 doing this. I was initially sceptical when others reported this problem, but once you look, the problem is definitely there (and it’s annoying!).

L

2 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

You might be referencing a different issue.  PR scenery done by most 3rd party is pretty low quality resolution at lower LOD levels when compared to LC type of scenery tiles (AF2, XP11 Ortho4XP, P3D are all pretty low quality IMHO).  PR devs use lower LOD levels when making the scenery due to file sizes, each increase in LOD when making the scenery is an exponential growth in file size.  To leverage very "crisp" PR tiles the scenery dev would need to go up at least 2 LODs which would produce HUGE file sizes (for example lets take MSE's California ... it's around 100GB of PR data right now with no AG), if MSE have sufficient source resolution (sat or aerial imagery) and shift/increase the LOD by two levels, you'd have California weighing in at over 1TB of PR data.  Most computers couldn't handle that much PR data.

Another "possible" issue which I've brought up with LM, is that the LOD radius doesn't appear to be working well for PR.  LM insist it's the limitation imposed by scenery developers and not an LM problem.  Chris Bell was kind enough to provide me with a small 2 LOD increase scenery sample which was VERY impressive but I was unable to determine if the LOD radius problem with PR was still present or not due to the limited size/area and huge file size ... here is the video I made with Chris Bell's very small 2 LOD increase PR where you can see the transition from high quality PR to Orbx LC (keep in mind I'm using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10):

Unfortunately this wasn't enough "area" for me to see how well this worked over distances.  It's by far the best PR quality I've ever seen in a simulator but it's a very small area sample due to massive file sizes.

I still feel there might be a problem with LOD distances and PR, but until someone does PR over a larger area such that LOD comes into play (i.e. 2 LODS higher) that covers a larger area, I can't really positively identify a problem with PR.

So it's still "undecided" until a PR dev comes up with a good test sample.  And even if the Test Sample does work as expected and LM are correct, there is still the problem of file size which makes usage of such high LOD PR impractical ... I'd be ok with downloading 1TB of PR data as I have 1Gbps bandwidth into my home and I'm not sure how common that is?  There also the issue of housing the data on a server and bandwidth costs in providing the data.

Cheers, Rob.

Again, a lot of thanks for this vid and explanation! Very appreciated. Ill watch it right away :-)

And here i can show a pic too. Yes, one reason often for sure is the overall lower quality of these sceneries. Though in these cases i know for sure it gets better, since on the older hardware the same sceneries looked a lot sharper/higher detailed. But let me show you.

One can see clearly that the orbx terrain is as crisp as it can be, there isnt much more to load on my setting (30cm). But the snowy area stays blurred. And it doesnt matter how often or slow i overfly this area, it stays like this.

Now one thing that came to my mind that it is simply an optical illusion thing, i mean,  the difference is now a lot bigger as ive had it before. On the old pc the orbx terrain never was this crisp, so maybe the photobg appears blurry bec the terrain around it is more crisp now as before but i dont know... That nearly cant be. Manila or Taiwan (Pacsim) are so blurry now and i loved those cities before, it was a lot more crisp for sure.

Now i look that vid/explanation :-) Thanks again.

PS. i should look at the vid and explanation before posting back probably but i did the other way around before i forget what i wanted to say hehe. Sorry...

 

42 minutes ago, SaenchaySor said:

But the snowy area stays blurred. And it doesnt matter how often or slow i overfly this area, it stays like this.

I'm assuming the snow area is not from Orbx?  If so, who's snow area is that? ... maybe provide some Lat/Long coordinates and season/date?  To me it looks like a mix of Orbx OpenLC (definitely not a region) and the snow part is something else that's not match to correct season?

57 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

I’ve got 10TB plus of orthoscenery, most in very high resolutions.

Scenery resolution is just one aspect, the key is at what LOD does the scenery designer use?

My thought process was that TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 would also improve LOD for "existing" PR.  I tested this extensively in early V4.0 Beta and PR didn't change.  I've kept reporting the issue but it was suggested by LM that PR needs to be "re-worked" to be able to work with TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10.  See my video below of early V4.0 beta testing using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP values with Orbx LOWI that uses PR.

As you can see the LC tiles adjust appropriately but the PR tiles do not.

Keep in mind this was LOWI for P3D V3.x at my time of testing as there obviously was no V4 LOWI ... I don't "think" LOWI has been recompiled specifically for V4 and I don't think any LOD adjustment have been made for LOWI for V4 (even today) ... but I could be wrong.

Cheers, Rob.

3 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Hi Jim, Turbo Boost is built into the 7700K and the 6700K, it's just an earlier version called Turbo Boost Max V2.0.  For more recent CPU's it's V3.0.  See references:

https://ark.intel.com/products/88195/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_20-GHz

https://ark.intel.com/products/97129/Intel-Core-i7-7700K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-4_50-GHz

Ok, but that isn't what I suggested ... disable Turbo Boost and set the CPU to a fixed frequency, leave HT enabled since the 6700K only has 4 real cores.  My suggestion was specific to more recent CPUs and was not a blanket solution for "blurries" or "laggy" texture loading.  I'd still recommend you get your BIOS updated to latest and if you're using Intel Turbo Boost V2.0 Technology then make sure you have the latest driver from Intel ... that's just best practices.  But again, this is NOT a cure for all blurries, it may help a few with the same situation as I ... also to be noted that after updating my BIOS to the latest and getting the latest Intel Turbo Boost Max V3.0 driver, my issue was solved and I can still have Turbo Boost Max enabled.

Cheers, Rob.

Thanks for your help and advice Rob, but after an initial surge of excitement thinking that your suggestion was definitely the cure, I have to report that there has been no improvement whatsoever. I tried disabling turbo boost, installed latest chipset drivers and MB and BIOS, but nothing worked.  

52 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I'm assuming the snow area is not from Orbx?  If so, who's snow area is that? ... maybe provide some Lat/Long coordinates and season/date?  To me it looks like a mix of Orbx OpenLC (definitely not a region) and the snow part is something else that's not match to correct season?

Scenery resolution is just one aspect, the key is at what LOD does the scenery designer use?

My thought process was that TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 would also improve LOD for "existing" PR.  I tested this extensively in early V4.0 Beta and PR didn't change.  I've kept reporting the issue but it was suggested by LM that PR needs to be "re-worked" to be able to work with TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10.  See my video below of early V4.0 beta testing using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP values with Orbx LOWI that uses PR.

As you can see the LC tiles adjust appropriately but the PR tiles do not.

Keep in mind this was LOWI for P3D V3.x at my time of testing as there obviously was no V4 LOWI ... I don't "think" LOWI has been recompiled specifically for V4 and I don't think any LOD adjustment have been made for LOWI for V4 (even today) ... but I could be wrong.

Cheers, Rob.

With P3Dv3 the quality shown using photo real scenery was better , so it is possible to make photo real scenery look good.

Imho no developer is going to make photo real scenery 2 LOD higher for large area.

It is a pity that they know the issue but have choosen another path.

JustMy2Cents

Gerard

2 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I'm assuming the snow area is not from Orbx?

Yes Rob, thats what it was. The pic was just an example how such an area looks like. In this case the crisp terrain is orbx germany south and the snow is EDDF (Aerosoft) with the wrong season.

It may be a bad example bec in EDDF it maybe really the reason that the photoground simply isnt higher resolution (but i think its at least higher as in my pic...). But EHAM though (Flytampa) or the now often mentioned asian sceneries Manila and Taiwan (Pacsim) are now very blurry while the outside stay super crsip. And im very sure that my EHAM was once very beautiful. Now its a blurry texture that always stays blurry.

I will go through some screenshots of the old pc and post it and the result will always be same: on the old pc the orbx terrain outside is not as crisp as now on the new one, while the photoground is always cripser on the old pc as it is now on the new one.

Doesnt really make sense, i know, but thats what makes me (and some others) wonder.

Just updated tonight in my machine from P3D v4.1 to v4.2 and now it takes longer time loading the airport (default). Is it normal?

13 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I've kept reporting the issue but it was suggested by LM that PR needs to be "re-worked" to be able to work with TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10

Hi Rob, given the opaque Sdk documentation, do you think you could ask LM to elaborate a little about the technicalities of how they believe PR needs to be reworked please? I'd like to test it a little.  If we can gain some certainty there may be opportunities for developers to produce improved PR sceneries for the P3D4 market.. 

Cheers K

18 hours ago, GSalden said:

Imho no developer is going to make photo real scenery 2 LOD higher for large area.

I tend to agree with you in "today's" hardware, maybe not tomorrows hardware where it looks like we'll have 60-100TB SSDs using 3D memory at considerably less cost (think standard HD prices - that's what Samsung claims by 2020 and folks from the Flash summit).  

5 hours ago, kevinfirth said:

do you think you could ask LM to elaborate a little about the technicalities of how they believe PR needs to be reworked please?

I'm not a scenery content provider, the folks more qualified (Orbx, MSE, etc.) to bring this to LM's attention have NOT been vocal (at least in my world of communications, there could be other avenues).  To be honest, I don't understand why they (scenery content providers) haven't been more vocal.  Since V4 was released LC looks so much better than PR that I avoid buying PR based scenery ... it just doesn't blend well with LC, even more so when using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10, but even at lower values PR still doesn't blend well and it's low quality is very obvious.  I'd much prefer to look at a slightly less accurate yet crisp/clear LC terrain than "at that moment in time" blurry PR terrain.  LC also has the advantage of seasons which would be very difficult to do with PR.  I like my season, they add a great dynamic to airports/locations making me want to fly the same routes over the 4 seasons vs. arriving at my destination in winter and it looks exactly the same as when I arrived in summer.

I've pushed about as far as I've can push and I seem to be the only person mentioning this to LM, time for someone else more qualified to pick up the ball and run with it.

Cheers, Rob. 

13 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

I tend to agree with you in "today's" hardware, maybe not tomorrows hardware where it looks like we'll have 60-100TB SSDs using 3D memory at considerably less cost (think standard HD prices - that's what Samsung claims by 2020 and folks from the Flash summit).  

I'm not a scenery content provider, the folks more qualified (Orbx, MSE, etc.) to bring this to LM's attention have NOT been vocal (at least in my world of communications, there could be other avenues).  To be honest, I don't understand why they (scenery content providers) haven't been more vocal.  Since V4 was released LC looks so much better than PR that I avoid buying PR based scenery ... it just doesn't blend well with LC, even more so when using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10, but even at lower values PR still doesn't blend well and it's low quality is very obvious.  I'd much prefer to look at a slightly less accurate to real world terrain than "at that moment in time" blurry PR terrain.  LC also has the advantage of season which would be very difficult to do with PR.  I like my season, they add a great dynamic to airports/locations making me want to fly the same routes over the 4 seasons vs. arriving at my destination in winter and it looks exactly the same as when I arrived in summer.

I've pushed about as far as I've can push and I seem to be the only person mentioning this to LM, time for someone else more qualified to pick up the ball and run with it.

Cheers, Rob. 

Within a short time Orbx will release FTX Netherlands , which is photo real scenery for the complete country with custom objects and AG and it has all seasons.

It would be a pilty if it looked not that great next to FTX Germany ( LC )....

 

1 hour ago, GSalden said:

Within a short time Orbx will release FTX Netherlands , which is photo real scenery for the complete country with custom objects and AG and it has all seasons.

Are you sure this is not a Region using PR?

Cheers, Rob.

50 minutes ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Are you sure this is not a Region using PR?

Cheers, Rob.

No Rob it is a fully PR region.

2 hours ago, Rob Ainscough said:

Are you sure this is not a Region using PR?

Cheers, Rob.

https://orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/144036-eu-netherlands-photoreal-alpha-shots/

Gerard, very nice pics and apparently not LC but is a Region? ... I didn't see any season shots, but keeping in mind the Netherlands is a fairly small area.  However, I guess this suggests that high quality PR is possible in P3D V4 and it's up to the content provider to make it happen ... this would be GREAT news indeed.

Cheers, Rob.