Anything more on the Blurries?

[ramsa329 0]

As I said before no post of mine is ever seen seen as a genuine response but immediately seen as an advertisement.This prevents me in most cases from even responding.It is a sad state of affairs in my opinion.Nick you posted a challenge about your quad core and your memory and when I respond to it you duck it using the old fallback.The facts are these:Not everyone can afford your equipment or spend the time to gain all of your knowledge.And there's a good chance they can achieve the same or better without that equipment as easily as with it.They have the right to explore that as well.Don't try to play the innocent everytime I respond to you. You love getting the personal thrill of being the local #1 and always right.Maybe I do charge for my service, it's called free enterprise and of course I gain from it.But you gain equally by becoming the go to guy boosting your ego and notoriety.So please cut the "holier than thou" attitude.and respond to me with the same respect I give you.I didn't say you doctored your screenshots. I responded to what I perceived as overstatement and to your challenge, your findings, and your tone of self-assuredness. and I will continue to do so. If this displeases you I am sorry.and............. whether you or anyone else believes that my motives are purerly financial and can't see my concern then that is the worst of all the lies.I love flightsim, especially FSX and have devoted my life's work to it and I am fed up with the misinformation (not yours specifically) which can cause users to throw endless amounts of money at problems that more often than not lead them nowhere.I have my own theories as to why things happen the way they do in FSX.and I am afraid that it goes deeper than hardware or even set-up.It goes to ,dare I say it................ design flaws from the very beginning and if I had been asked I would have said it and I would have offered solutions.But banging my head constantly against the cult of personality or against the "Big Boys" way on top is not my way.and I don't want to see every post of mine cut off by some moderator.So I'll sign off of this in the same way as I have before. Wishing all of you (even you Phil Taylor) the best with your sims and your equipment.Michael Greenblattwww.fs-gs.com

[Guest Nick_N]

>Nick you posted a challenge about your quad core and your memory and when I respond to it you duck it using the old fallback.MichaelQuote NickN:>The hardware is the base of the "possible" end result, the user and how they configure/set it (and Windows) up is the key to unlocking the potential.Just the opposite sir. I stated quite clearly there was much more to it than hardwareYou are challenging me because I made a statement about hardware that is in fact quite true in the context I posted it??I think not. I do not believe for one minute your challenge came from a place of wanting to contribute.If that were true you would be in forums posting information to help people, and, you would be listing those FSX "defects" and tips on how to deal with them, or at the very least contributing on some level.Now, I was going to take your post apart and respond to everything, then I realized I don

[ramsa329 0]

Nick,Not worth a reply

[Guest Nick_N]

Agreed, that's why I didnt take yours apartnot worth it

[cklink 0]

J van E nailed it, as did Bert - but this again got skipped over ...If you have problems with textures keeping up at the level you set within the confines of the FSX graphics engine - It's a harware/slider issue - period. Lower you settings until you spend some bucks. But then once you have and they keep up, you'll be asking ...How to extend the visual ring of hi res textures (Which is not the stereotypical blurries issue beat to death in this forum) - but is a seperate issue within the engine - that no harware will EVER fix. I could have a Cray supercomputer with the grapics built by Nvidia's R&D department - and you will never see 1M textures past where FSX tells it to drop off and load a lower mip etc. And by best guess that happens to be about 1 Mile from my eye at 1500 AGL. (unless you crank LOD_Radius to 6.5 or so)Phil has stated that he is "digging into" this issue, hopefully to come back and clearly tell us "IF" texture resolution can be controlled via a config seperate from LOD Radius parameter, there may be hope for those who what clearer textures out farther - and have the horsepower to have them keep up. I expect as more upgrade over time in a year or so, this query will continue - but it is still not to be confused with "The Blurries" ...I hope FS11 gives us the ability to adjust the resolution range of textures - regardless of what the mesh etc under is at.Anyways, yet another opinion on the subject ...Regards'Garett

[Guest]

This is also in reply to Bert Pieke's post (#26). I understand what you are saying, and also already thought this could be the case, but how come others say they can see everything sharp as far as they can see...? Is it just a matter of personal taste? Do some people simply not see the textures getting loaded because they have no eye for it? And I do? I am a graphic designer and work with two big screens and Photoshop (and InDesign) all day, so maybe my eyes can see or notice things others don't? Maybe I am wishing too much...?Still, when I see certain screenshots, it seems to me everything IS crips and clear and sharp...Anyway, if Bert Pieke says that what I see from my VC-window is very normal, I wonder how everyone can FULLY enjoy the sim, because I personally can't close my eyes for the constant popping up of textures... As I said, I DO enjoy FSX, but this always bothers me. Maybe I should only look in the distance and set the textures to 2m so the higher ones never get loaded at all. Then all will be slightly blurred, but 1. I won't notice that unless I look straight down and 2. everything will look the same and quite okay, because right now it seems to me I can only see the very last and highest textures getting loaded: what I see above the red line are the 2m textures, I think.Anyway, apart from this all, forcing FSAA with nHancer doesn't work on my computer and maybe there still is something to gain be getting things set up right! ;)

[Guest]

Okay, so I will try some different settings. It funny though that some say to drop the figure and other say you have to raise it! ;) I'll try everything between 30 to 80 and see what happens. ;)

[Alvega 2,124]

>Anyway, apart from this all, forcing FSAA with nHancer doesn't>work on my computer and maybe there still is something to gain>be getting things set up right! ;) Can you confirm you have "Enhance in-game AA setting" disabled in nHancer?

[virtualstuff 758]

>:( ;)>>Last update for today: no luck. FSAA still won't work without>enabling it in FSX. And btw even without FSAA the textures>load late. Still, I do think I have something to focus on now!>It IS strange however that I just installed Vista from scratch>and have the same problem... Maybe it's hardware related, I>don't know. We'll see... or not.:-lol it's maybe real easy and most important did you try to disable the current profiles in Nhancer and make new ones?Had the same issue and that solved it for me ;-) http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y156/awf1/sign.jpg

[Guest]

Hm, I do remember NOT reading that in the various instructions I've read and wondering what to do with it. It could well be that the option is on. Can't check it right now, but that could well be (with 90% certainty)...! Could that be the (quite simple) solution?

[Art_P 6]

>how come others say they can see everything sharp as far as they can see...?

[Alvega 2,124]

Nick's settings are not the best for my system also. I get better quality with my own settings, every system is different and what works for one may not work for the other.

[Alvega 2,124]

>Hm, I do remember NOT reading that in the various>instructions I've read and wondering what to do with it. It>could well be that the option is on. Can't check it right now,>but that could well be (with 90% certainty)...! Could that be>the (quite simple) solution? Let's hope it is the solution and you can solve your problem. Let me know if it did. ;-)

[Guest Nick_N]

What I listed came with much more than just graphics card settings. The driver settings are only one part of a chain of things that start with system setup, Windows optimizing, disk optimizing, driver settings and end with tuning FSX correctly for all of the above.I know it can be difficult for those who may not be computer savvy to go through all the lists I post and to tune FSX correctly. Sliders in FSX can affect more than one area, example.. the scenery complexity level and the AI traffic levels go hand in hand because of the jet-ways and if AI is cranked up too far with respect to the system ability, the scenery complexity slider being raised may then start a chain of events with AI whereby every hub in a 50-125NM radius is calculated for gates... that will kill CPU cycles and therefore the trickle-down effect can trash the terrain.I have also mentioned that settings are not set in stone and although what I use is the most common I have found works, there are variations however most of them are in the FSX settings and not other areas. However there are always variables in drivers which may work differently for different hardware. Setting 4xS instead of 8xS may be a better solution for one system over another... setting the multicore feature to ON instead of off in XP is also a variable I have seen work differently from time to time.The point is, what I have posted in the way of FSX install, Windows optimizing, disk maintenance, driver settings, etc.. was a guideline to try and help place a system in the best possible position for tuning FSX. There of course can be variations that are system dependent but most of those variations are in FSX tuning more than anything else.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

I'm not pretending that I'm an expert on this :-)As more information becomes available, we all learn. On my system, the things that have improved the overall experience, include running AA at 8XS and AF at 8x. Some swear by AF at 16x, but I cannot see the difference. 8XS looks really good and does not cost me in frame-rates. Requires nhancer to set. I learned this on this forum.The way to set AA seems to depend on the actual nvidia driver release.On my older driver release, I could override the FSX setting, on my current release (163.71) I can only "Enhance" the FSX setting.Other tweaks that work for me are running Autogen with Number of buildings at zero and Trees at 3000. I learned that on this forum.I recently replaced the trees by GenXTrees which look just as good, but require less resources.So, just like everyone else, I keep adjusting for best performance and best visuals, and am pretty happy with the current state of affairs.Lets wait for Phil to tell us once and for all if the detail radius for close-in high resolution textures can be tweaked independently of the global scenery radius. Q6600 @ 3.0 - WinXP - 2 GB PC800 RAM - 8600 GTS 256 MB - FSX Accel.