Great Seasonal Support

[fluffyflops 1,861]

9 hours ago, Sethos said:

And squishing the picture down to 1600 x 666 is equally disingenuous, hiding every actual detail you'd see flying. 

i remember the guy in p3d some 5 plus years ago who used to lock his frames at 10fps to make screenshots for forumns.  Complete waste of mine, but whatever floats your boat. 

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by fluffyflops

[fluffyflops 1,861]

On 12/4/2023 at 12:21 AM, GoranM said:

I don’t have much scenery installed. 

thats good, because alot of the old sceneries for xp11 tank your frames in xp12 at night.  Not all of them i agree, but quite a few.

 

[efis007 892]

On 12/5/2023 at 1:29 PM, Sethos said:

And squishing the picture down to 1600 x 666 is equally disingenuous

Those images were reduced due to regulatory needs of the Xplane_org forum which prohibited (and still prohibits) the insertion of images that are too large and/or that exceed a limit of "xxx" kilobytes.
The original images (which I no longer have as I have unfortunately overwritten them) were in Full HD 1920 x 1080 and exceeded the KB limit, so I reduced them in size.
No disingenuous therefore, the downsizing was just a technical requirement imposed by a site.

[GoranM 3,778]

38 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Those images were reduced due to regulatory needs of the Xplane_org forum which prohibited (and still prohibits) the insertion of images that are too large and/or that exceed a limit of "xxx" kilobytes.
The original images (which I no longer have as I have unfortunately overwritten them) were in Full HD 1920 x 1080 and exceeded the KB limit, so I reduced them in size.
No disingenuous therefore, the downsizing was just a technical requirement imposed by a site.

A couple things I find quite interesting.  You mentioned you captured those images in 2014.  I don't doubt it because the TIFF data shows it was taken on the 1st of November, 2014.  And I'm assuming you posted them in 2014.

Having a look at your x-plane.org profile, I noticed your first post was in 2015.  And those images look quite spectacular for the time.  They also look noticeably larger than the different images you posted in here.  

I mean, spectacular images!

What a shame you didn't post those in here to show what X-Plane was capable of 8 years ago.

I could still tell they're not X-Plane 12, by the look of the scenery.  But something I find puzzling.  Seeing as you said...

38 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Those images were reduced due to regulatory needs of the Xplane_org forum

...I checked the images you posted, and they were higher resolution back then.

In saying all that, I couldn't find the images you posted in here, over at x-plane.org.  Unless you posted them well after 2014.  But seeing as you mentioned they were captured in 2014, and your first few images were posted in 2015, I just assumed you posted them in 2014.

Happy to be corrected.

 

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by GoranM

[Sethos 4,521]

31 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Those images were reduced due to regulatory needs of the Xplane_org forum which prohibited (and still prohibits) the insertion of images that are too large and/or that exceed a limit of "xxx" kilobytes.
The original images (which I no longer have as I have unfortunately overwritten them) were in Full HD 1920 x 1080 and exceeded the KB limit, so I reduced them in size.
No disingenuous therefore, the downsizing was just a technical requirement imposed by a site.

But this isn't X-Plane.org, so point is moot. 

[Biology 1,347]

Really nice screenshots! Sorry, it's a bit unrelated but what do you use for the scenery? Is it orthophoto or something like SFD Global? If it's ortho, I'm surprised by how color accurate the terrain looks - if you used some kind of color correction for the tiles I would be really appreciated if you post the settings for it.

Edited December 6, 2023 by Biology

[efis007 892]

33 minutes ago, Sethos said:

But this isn't X-Plane.org, so point is moot. 

I wrote that I had overwritten the original images after resizing.
Had I written it?
Yes. 

Besides... what would 1920 pixel images be used for?
What do you think you'll see differently compared to 1666 pixels?
We don't need 4k resolution to see if XP10 showed chickens on the ground ! 😄
In those photos there is only the winter environment recreated by Xp10 in a clear sky dawn.
There is nothing else to see.
At whatever resolution you look at it, that image does not change, it will always only show... light...snow...trees...runway...sky. 

When Sir Lanrivaldosmith (the first user to comment) asked me what the photo was, I immediately told him it was XP10, not XP12.
So what are we talking about?
Of nothing.
If some XP12 fans don't like the winter landscape of the XP10, that's absolutely not my problem and I don't worry about it at all.
Personally I like the snowy landscape of XP10 almost as much as the snowy landscape shown by Sir Tonywob, and since I found those old images in the archive I wanted to show them.
End of the matter. 

[Sethos 4,521]

2 minutes ago, efis007 said:

I wrote that I had overwritten the original images after resizing.
Had I written it?
Yes. 

Besides... what would 1920 pixel images be used for?
What do you think you'll see differently compared to 1666 pixels?
We don't need 4k resolution to see if XP10 showed chickens on the ground ! 😄
In those photos there is only the winter environment recreated by Xp10 in a clear sky dawn.
There is nothing else to see.
At whatever resolution you look at it, that image does not change, it will always only show... light...snow...trees...runway...sky. 

When Sir Lanrivaldosmith (the first user to comment) asked me what the photo was, I immediately told him it was XP10, not XP12.
So what are we talking about?
Of nothing.
If some XP12 fans don't like the winter landscape of the XP10, that's absolutely not my problem and I don't worry about it at all.
Personally I like the snowy landscape of XP10 almost as much as the snowy landscape shown by Sir Tonywob, and since I found those old images in the archive I wanted to show them.
End of the matter. 

Load of dribble, of course a picture need to be a proper size to see the details. Can't turn it into a glorified thumbnail and try to make a valid detail comparison. 

[efis007 892]

Just now, Sethos said:

Can't turn it into a glorified thumbnail and try to make a valid detail comparison. 

Who ever talked about "comparison"?

[Sethos 4,521]

2 minutes ago, efis007 said:

Who ever talked about "comparison"?

When you posted your X-Plane 10 shots completely unnecessarily, you created an unneeded comparison. No need to play dumb and be disingenuous. 

[efis007 892]

Drink some chamomile tea friend.
I wish you a good day. 

[Humpty 751]

I still don't get the point of posting those images ? 

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Humpty

[Bjoern 1,158]

Great XP10 shots (also in that thread dug up by Goran), @efis007!

The native season support in XP12 is a godsent though. Setting up seasonal textures in XP11 was a PITA.

 

On 12/5/2023 at 9:29 AM, tonywob said:

Mine is custom made with my own tool/workflow, but you can get pretty close using free utilities such as Simheaven and just orthos.

I know my ortho4xp and X-World, so come on, give us the juicy details about what you're doing differently. Ortho source, zoom level, color correction method (manual/script), overlay source, overlay build queue, etc, etc! 😉

 

20 hours ago, fluffyflops said:

i remember the guy in p3d some 5 plus years ago who used to lock his frames at 10fps to make screenshots for forumns.  Complete waste of mine, but whatever floats your boat.

Some faint memory here of that practice being popular during the FS2004 days as well.

[fluffyflops 1,861]

1 hour ago, Humpty said:

I still don't get the point of posting those images ? 

 

agreed.

[GoranM 3,778]

8 hours ago, efis007 said:

Who ever talked about "comparison"?

If it wasn't a comparison, it's even more curious why you would post them.