I really like this, having tested the demo version, but I have now bought it at Just Flight, where it is considerably less expensive, in the UK at least.
Just Flight - FSRealistic Pro

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by Reader

50 minutes ago, Reader said:

I really like this, having tested the demo version, but I have now bought it at Just Flight, where it is considerably less expensive, in the UK at least.
Just Flight - FSRealistic Pro

+1.

One of my favorite stores.

I think what may be at play here is that some are confusing the difference between:-

1. What is actually moving, during turbulance or ground contact, and...
2. What the eyes perceive, and how that looks to us (us, as in, the brain 😄)

Of course the cockpit (or car, in the car analogies) are not detached and moving independently to the rest of the frame, however relative distance, visual distance accuity and parallex effect are all going to perhaps cause us to perceive that things in our near vision are moving to a greater degree than things in our more distant vision (even though, as per point 1 above, they are not).

Owning the product, I can certainly see what @Sesquashtoo is describing, but I never considered it inaccurate or a problem. 

If you stand in front of a shopping trolley during an Earthquake, with another shopping trolley 200m away, wouldn't the shopping trolley in front of you appear to move more than the the one in the distance?  (As I've typed that analogy, I've realized how odd and silly it is, but what the heck, I've always felt we don't talk enough about shopping trolleys, here at AVSIM 😁).

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by JYW

On 6/17/2022 at 4:03 PM, jarmstro said:

So I'm left with a few sound effects and not much else for £30

I'm amazed there's such a price difference according to where you buy it.  £30??   I just paid £21 at Just Flight.

The long and short of it is that some people just don't seem to understand parallax.  This nearer objects always appear to move more. 
I wouldn't expect a window frame and the wing tip to move by the same amount in vision, as that would just be turbulence without head movement. 

The FSRealistic camera is just imitating head movement in turbulence, that is why people see the difference in movement between the different parts at different distances - parallax effect.  It is supposed to look like that.  Simple physics at play.

4 minutes ago, bobcat999 said:

The long and short of it is that some people just don't seem to understand parallax.  This nearer objects always appear to move more. 
I wouldn't expect a window frame and the wing tip to move by the same amount in vision, as that would just be turbulence without head movement. 

The FSRealistic camera is just imitating head movement in turbulence, that is why people see the difference in movement between the different parts at different distances - parallax effect.  It is supposed to look like that.  Simple physics at play.

Finally someone gets it.....

2 hours ago, bobcat999 said:

The long and short of it is that some people just don't seem to understand parallax.  This nearer objects always appear to move more. 
I wouldn't expect a window frame and the wing tip to move by the same amount in vision, as that would just be turbulence without head movement. 

The FSRealistic camera is just imitating head movement in turbulence, that is why people see the difference in movement between the different parts at different distances - parallax effect.  It is supposed to look like that.  Simple physics at play.

Yes but in this case parallax is not in play. In the case of the 737 glare shield, say, the whole thing moves independently of the whole cockpit. There is no parallax. If my head moves up I would expect to be able to see the top of the glare shield but I can't. All I see is the front of the glare shield positioned a bit higher. My head hasn't moved but the glare shield has. It's just a separate part of the cockpit wobbling up and down. It's not your head that moves. It's the parts of the cockpit which is the opposite of what should happen?
 

Out of interest how is this effect working in VR?

EDIT. So looking left out of the window in the Islander at the engine my eye and the engine are perfectly aligned and neither moves out of alignment even a fraction. But the window moves up and down. No way is this correct or lifelike.

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by jarmstro

8 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Yes but in this case parallax is not in play. In the case of the 737 glare shield, say, the whole thing moves independently of the whole cockpit. There is no parallax. If my head moves up I would expect to be able to see the top of the glare shield but I can't. All I see is the front of the glare shield positioned a bit higher. My head hasn't moved but the glare shield has. It's just a separate part of the cockpit wobbling up and down?
 

Out of interest how is this effect working in VR?

Maybe you should drop Randazzo a line, might be some loose screws in the glare shield. The Fenix has no such problem.  😉

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by Bobsk8

17 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

Yes but in this case parallax is not in play. In the case of the 737 glare shield, say, the whole thing moves independently of the whole cockpit. There is no parallax. If my head moves up I would expect to be able to see the top of the glare shield but I can't. All I see is the front of the glare shield positioned a bit higher. My head hasn't moved but the glare shield has. It's just a separate part of the cockpit wobbling up and down. It's not your head that moves. It's the parts of the cockpit which is the opposite of what should happen?
 

Out of interest how is this effect working in VR?

no, that is 100% incorrect. your eyepoint/head position is moving in very small amounts. the small distances moved are quite visible with closer objects like the glareshield, but basically imperceptible compared to distant objects like the scenery outside the windows or wingtips.

do an experiment in real life. stand in front of one of the windows in your domicile. focus on a point in the distance, like a tree or building that's at least 20 or 30 feet away. keep your eyes focused and locked on one point on that object, then move your head left and right and notice how the elements of your window (the sill or any dirt on the glass or frame etc) move a lot and the thing you're focusing on doesn't appear to move at all.

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by molleh

3 minutes ago, molleh said:

no, that is 100% incorrect. your eyepoint/head position is moving in very small amounts. the small distances moved are quite visible with closer objects like the glareshield, but basically imperceptible compared to distant objects like the scenery outside the windows or wingtips.

A quote from an edit I made above:

So looking left out of the window in the Islander at the engine my eye and the engine are perfectly aligned and neither moves out of alignment even a fraction. But the window moves up and down. No way is this correct or lifelike.

Both should move but the window should move more than the engine. But the engine doesn't move at all. It's just not right.

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by jarmstro

Just now, jarmstro said:

A quote from an edit I made above:

So looking left out of the window in the Islander at the engine my eye and the engine are perfectly aligned and neither moves out of alignment even a fraction. But the window moves up and down. No way is this correct or lifelike.

read the edit i made to my post and go try that.

3 minutes ago, molleh said:

read the edit i made to my post and go try that.

Sorry. It's just not right. The cockpit moves but nothing else outside the cockpit does. And some things in some cockpits move separately from each other. I can't put it any more plainly than that.

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by jarmstro

Just now, jarmstro said:

Sorry. It's just not right. The cockpit moves but nothing else outside the cockpit does.

my mind is actually blown that someone would actually disagree with this. i'm just gonna be honest, it feels like arguing with someone who insists 2+2 does not equal 4. i just dunno how else to explain this.

14 minutes ago, molleh said:

my mind is actually blown that someone would actually disagree with this. i'm just gonna be honest, it feels like arguing with someone who insists 2+2 does not equal 4. i just dunno how else to explain this.

My feelings exactly. So I'm looking at the engine out of the left window. My eye and the engine are aligned and neither move on my monitor by even a pixel. But in between the window frame is moving up and down. I would be grateful if you you could indeed explain this in layman's language to a poor soul who does not realise that 2+2=4. Because to my inadequate mind the engine should also move relative to its distance from my eye compared to the window. Maybe by a small amount but it should still move. My head goes up, the window goes down, but the engine stays exactly where it was. It's not right.

Edited June 19, 20223 yr by jarmstro

6 minutes ago, jarmstro said:

My feelings exactly. So I'm looking at the engine out of the left window. My eye and the engine are aligned and neither move on my monitor by even a pixel. But in between the window frame is moving up and down. I would be grateful if you you could indeed explain this in layman's language to a poor soul who does not realise that 2+2=4. Because to my inadequate mind the engine should also move relative to its distance from my eye compared to the window. Maybe by a small amount but it should still move. My head goes up, the window goes down, but the engine stays exactly where it was.

i made a small recording just for you. look at the cars across the street. do you think i'm waving a window in front of the camera, or am i just moving my head (camera) very slightly from side to side?