I was just wondering what 7cm/pixel ground texture would look like. I THINK that FSX default is 1m but I could be wrong. Do you guys think we will ever see an addon come out for FSX with 7cm/pixel resolution??

I wouldn't mind a 7cm texture for the airport.:)

Hi there,the 7cm position of the texture resolution slider exists because all textured vectors -- roads, shorelines, streams, railroads -- are meant to utilize that resolution.Place yourself in top-down view over a vector road (not one of those that are part of a ground texture) and switch between 1m and 7cm. At 1m the road surface is blurry but at 7cm you should see the road markings. Similarly, we've found that photoreal ground textures compiled at 50-cm resolution show more detail when the slider is at 60cm than at 1m setting so it seems that the general 1-m maximum res for ground textures isn't necessarily a "hard" boundary.Cheers, Holger

>I was just wondering what 7cm/pixel ground texture would look>like. I THINK that FSX default is 1m but I could be wrong. >Do you guys think we will ever see an addon come out for FSX>with 7cm/pixel resolution??Why not just set the texture resolution to 7cm and look around... this is a highway provided by Ultimate Terrain. But a quad-core might be needed to process it smoothly in real time...Loyd7cm to 1m comparisonhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179487.jpg

7cm looks great. FSX driving simulator anyone :)

I think that it'll become the standard for airport textures, as the older methods of placing high resolution ground polygons become obsolete. The older methods sometimes would have utilised images of that resolution, but stuck on a ground polygon. Although some of the older methods still work in FSX+SP2, they may not in FS11, and developers may have learnt a valuable lesson about relying on old techniques with the release of SP2.Sceneries like Flightzone will no doubt instead of having custom ground textures under the airport, have a high resolution aerial image in the same way that FS2004 displayed 4.8 m/px photo imagery.The new scenery in Acceleration shows what complete FSX-compliant scenery would look like -- high resolution aerial imagery around the airport (I don't know what the resolution is here, but it is higher than default), default runways and taxiways, plus high quality 3D models.I've been trying this method at the moment, using 12cm resolution imagery, but the first hurdle is how to show custom runway textures. I may have to cheat a bit, use an older method to place the runway textures, and cross my fingers that we get a useful new method in FS11.-Robin

Berlin-Tempelhof has 1.2 meter/pixel resolutionEdwards AFB - 60 centimeters/pixelIstanbul - 1.2 meters/pixelLas Vegas - 1.2 meters/pixelLongleat - 1.2 meters/pixelReno - 1.2 meters/pixelRio de Janeiro - 1.2 meters/pixelSint Maarten - 1.2 meters/pixelHere is the Eiffel Tower in Paris - FS 9 at 4.77 meters/pixel:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179506.jpgAnd in FS X at 30 centimeters per pixel:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179507.jpgThe Google image has twice that resolution (15 centimeters) if anybody is interested.Best regards.Luis

then what's the reason that when you get close to the ground it's still a blurry flattened image. It seems that things look outstanding from top down view but the more you view from a "level-ed out" it gets flat and "not as pretty".

Hello Dave,Champ-de-Mars in cockpit viewhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179553.jpgI don't know exactly why you get blurried ground textures - there are a lot of possibilities, and the following remarks may very well not apply to you.For most of the complaints that I have seen here so far, however, the cause is pretty clear - people do not completely understand the rendering priorities of FS.They seem to believe that by pushing all display sliders to full right (maximum) that this will force the display of the highest possible resolution ground.This is not so. FS does not work that way.When FS start to run out of resources, it begins by dumping high-resolution textures in order to continue to have resources for other aspects of the game. The result is the dread "blurries".The solution is to turn everything down all the way! Then, set Global Textures to maximum, Texture Resolution to 1 meter, LOD Radius to the minimum, and Mesh Resolution to 38 meters. Then, see if the ground is blurry.If not, then slowly start turning some things up and check the results in game. Stop turning sliders up when blurries start to appear.Of course, some "experts" will immediately reply that they have a different problem, that FS is "flawed", that there is no reason why they should have top-of-the-line computers and not be able to push all sliders to the right, and why should they have to spend their lives tweaking? (Oh, and what the heck were the beta testers doing when any idiot could see these problems?)I don't disagree with any of those objections, but perhaps most people would get better performance if they had lower expectations - and sliders!Best regards.Luis(who, by the way, has a 4 year old AMD XP 3000+. 512 MB slow RAM, a GeForce 5200 (!!!) and never gets blurries, never. Lots of micro-stutters (but then, I have always gotten those with all versions of FS) and my FS does not look as good as those who have better vid cards, but who cares, I am having fun, not complaining.)

If you read the "blurries" thread, you will notice that many people who complain about it have understood your point.But the problem they have is not the one you describe, that's all. There is something wrong with blurries in FSX.When you shut down autogen and get 60 FPS with blurries, then cap FPS to 20 and still get the same blurries, there is something wrong.When you install FSX and have no blurries, but then you install SP1 and you get awfull blurries, there is something wrong.When you read that someone with a 4 years old computer has no blurries and you have blurries all the time on your high-end computer, even with all sliders but textures one on the left, there is something wrong.Sorry to have bothered you with my problems, which were not the topic of this thread, but please do not believe it is just a problem of expectation, settings or any other user-dependant problem. Yes, FS -at least SP1- is flawed.RegardsJulien