Question for MSFS Tree gurus....

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

So you have a choice of LOW/Medium/High/Ultra

My question is, do all of those offerings only mitigate how many trees are populated upon the MSFS landscape...OR...(and this is the important part of my question..) does that also mitigate how many different trees and species you would see?  The reason that I am asking is that I actually prefer the ground coverage (for trees) set to Medium, but...by setting to that, am I getting every tree graphic and species that there is...or do you have to set the Tree setting to Ultra to be able to get every tree/version/species that is in MSFS?

Does anybody know the answer to the above?

Thanks...

Ses

[Fiorentoni 4,223]

16 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

So you have a choice of LOW/Medium/High/Ultra

My question is, do all of those offerings only mitigate how many trees are populated upon the MSFS landscape...OR...(and this is the important part of my question..) does that also mitigate how many different trees and species you would see?  The reason that I am asking is that I actually prefer the ground coverage (for trees) set to Medium, but...by setting to that, am I getting every tree graphic and species that there is...or do you have to set the Tree setting to Ultra to be able to get every tree/version/species that is in MSFS?

Does anybody know the answer to the above?

Thanks...

Ses

It does not change the type and species, only the quantity (both by amount and LOD) and quality (higher = more density in an individual tree, more volume).

[snglecoil 1,828]

I believe it changes the foliage complexity/density as well, although not in the way that you immediately think it works. Set it to low and you’ll see what I mean.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

Thanks for both replies...I do see of course density differences, but it is hard to tell if the actual trees 'look' different.  I guess as long as I am happy with the Medium...I'll just stay with that.  I find that going over Medium makes the forestry seem less real world, for my tastes. 🙂

[Ixoye 1,821]

Take a look at this video, it explains it well

Edited November 28, 2021 by Ixoye

[cianpars 1,165]

Mine is set to ultra, but i have tried high and both look fone to me.  Ultra probably does have too many trees.

As for FPS, I'm not sure what impact that has as I lock at 30, so see no difference 

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

1 hour ago, Ixoye said:

Take a look at this video, it explains it well

Drat...and thank you for the vid...yeah...I see that not only do you get more tree cover, BUT...the trees have the highest definition and feature (subtle and pronounced.)  I guess that I will then have to settle for either High or Ultra to realize the most from my Four Seasons add on...   Thanks!

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

1 hour ago, cianpars said:

Mine is set to ultra, but i have tried high and both look fone to me.  Ultra probably does have too many trees.

As for FPS, I'm not sure what impact that has as I lock at 30, so see no difference 

Yes, for me as well, setting to Ultra does not reduce my 30 fps.  I only wanted to reduce the actual coverage density...but that vid did show beyond doubt that also image definition also plays into the different settings...so...I guess back to Ultra, or give a go of High and see how that looks....

[bean_sprout 1,201]

I'm  thinking high might be the ticket.

Cheers

bs

Edited November 28, 2021 by bean_sprout

[V1ROTA7E 718]

37 minutes ago, Sesquashtoo said:

I only wanted to reduce the actual coverage density...but that vid did show beyond doubt that also image definition also plays into the different settings...

I wish they had 3 sliders. One for Autogen LOD, one for Vegetation LOD, and another for Terrain LOD. I'd keep autogen and tree quality low or medium, but have houses and buildings stretch out as far as the eye can see, same with trees. LOD 200-300 is fine for terrain since it prevents blurries...but if it's covered in trees and houses, terrain LOD wouldn't matter that much anyway.

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

There is a mod for sale for all of NZ that replaces the vegetation with more locally appropriate species based on detailed vegetation maps and it looks amazing - however it seems to have a severe performance hit when first loading your flight post SU5 (RTX3070/9900K/32GB/NVME) that I do no think is resolved yet. 

I think there is a generic sim issue that limits what you can achieve once you go past changing a few generic tree models and their colors.

[Ixoye 1,821]

This is a good guide for best graphics settings without losing too much performance.

https://www.flightsimulator.blog/2021/11/18/best-graphics-settings-guide/

Edited November 29, 2021 by Ixoye

[Ixoye 1,821]

1 hour ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

There is a mod for sale for all of NZ that replaces the vegetation with more locally appropriate species based on detailed vegetation maps and it looks amazing - however it seems to have a severe performance hit when first loading your flight post SU5 (RTX3070/9900K/32GB/NVME) that I do no think is resolved yet. 

I think there is a generic sim issue that limits what you can achieve once you go past changing a few generic tree models and their colors.

I had that mod, but be aware that it's not compatible with Bijan's mod.

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

22 hours ago, bean_sprout said:

I'm  thinking high might be the ticket.

Cheers

bs

I'm just about to set it to that shortly. I really like the Medium setting as it gives a good mixture of what the world truly looks like...30 percent tree and forestry in Michigan, and 70 percent open field and bushes. But..that being typed...I also want the best visuals and specie count...so, from what I see on that video...that isn't going to happen with low to medium.  So...as you say, probably (hopeully)  with High, you get less ground coverage, but the same visual as with Ultra.  Hope so...or I just use Ultra, as the trade off...to what I would 'like' my virtual world to render...  Decisions, decisions...(sigh)....

[Sesquashtoo 2,846]

On 11/28/2021 at 4:46 PM, bean_sprout said:

I'm  thinking high might be the ticket.

Cheers

bs

Well, Mr. Bean...High it is...   I just spent about an hour circling Mackinaw Island, which I know very well, the whole of it, and circled around Fort Mackinaw in MSFS-G.  I still think that Medium give the best real world representation of what forestry cover there is in places I know well...but,  you indeed take a hit on the detailing of the trees, and various species.  So,  I then concentrated on circling Mack Island, over and above the Fort, between High and Ultra.  Ultra indeed over-killed the forestry that I know exists on the Fort property...and while High still had too many trees for what is there in real life (funny how Medium pretty much has it spot on...ground and lawn clearance to tree density and foliage) it gives you the detailing of the trees and types, but at about a 20 percent less of density.  I guess I will have to stay with High, rather than Medium...but,  Ultra is way overkill, if you have the rest of all your settings at Ultra or Ultra(plus).  

So...back to my flight over and around Mackinaw Island, but for Trees, the setting of High has just been carved into the 'stone'...lol.

Cheers,