8 hours ago, Pugilist2 said:

Lol, come on really the second picture has way too much haze! I think most people on these forums that use flight simulators who are not real world pilots have still flown in planes on trips every now and then and looked out the window at high altitude.

I agree, the first picture looks accurate, but the second has way too much haze for a clear day even at high altitude unless the visibility is set very low.

It was more a quantitative than a qualitative (or the other way round? 🙂) comparison. I didn't have other pictures at hand at that moment and didn't want to do some myself ...

 

27 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Are there average visibility figures available for a country that could be used as a default, ...

I very doubt it. If you are e.g. in an industrial area of a country, the air will be much more polluted (be it humidity or fine particles) than in a mountainous area of the same country. It rather would make more sense to differentiate between industrial and mountainous areas, and there are certainly many more factors to be considered.

Edited June 6, 20251 yr by uwespeed

22 minutes ago, uwespeed said:

I very doubt it. If you are e.g. in an industrial area of a country, the air will be much more polluted (be it humidity or fine particles) than in a mountainous area of the same country. It rather would make more sense to differentiate between industrial and mountainous areas, and there are certainly many more factors to be considered.

I can only imagine how many factors are involved 😮

If the visibility is going to be set at 14.9, because that's the maximum being reported, maybe it could be doubled in sim for a more realistic look (or some other variable figure say up to 50 miles)?  In the UK today we have a very clear airmass with showers, but I am getting 14.9 in sim which is nowhere near reality.

I don't think the issue is with X-Plane, in the South of France I get for today:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/7s6mf7blwa1ux66p8zqcq/Soaring-paradise.png?rlkey=qghz1rblbpe5trf75a58bresg&st=3yjdgp8z&dl=0

If the Metar is reporting 14.9, that is what is depicted. Probably Laminar can work this value with some art controls, is this already existing? 

1 hour ago, soaring_penguin said:

I don't think the issue is with X-Plane, in the South of France I get for today:

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/7s6mf7blwa1ux66p8zqcq/Soaring-paradise.png?rlkey=qghz1rblbpe5trf75a58bresg&st=3yjdgp8z&dl=0

If the Metar is reporting 14.9, that is what is depicted. Probably Laminar can work this value with some art controls, is this already existing? 

It is an issue with the way XP12 calculates the haze, because it isn't right to constantly get 14.9.

I don’t get that, but I fly usually in the south of France, where METAR is giving the actual numbers. 

My screenshot is showing mountains way further away, and probably they are in real life not visible due to haze… 😉 

 

If your nearby airfield is telling 14.5, that’s what you will see in the sim.

2 hours ago, soaring_penguin said:

If your nearby airfield is telling 14.5, that’s what you will see in the sim.

This is the problem - XP12 sets the visibility to that figure as a max in many cases, even if the visibility is much more.

18 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

This is the problem - XP12 sets the visibility to that figure as a max in many cases, even if the visibility is much more.

And how should the programmers know that this number isn't correct?

But I am sure LR is aware and will come up with some clever solution. Best is that you write them a weather bug report.

25 minutes ago, soaring_penguin said:

And how should the programmers know that this number isn't correct?

No Idea.

In the UK the ATIS will report 'visibility greater than 10 miles'. XP12 doesn't know what the actual visibility is above 10 miles, so we are getting a fixed 14.9 miles. I just wonder if they could use a fixed number higher than 10, which in reality is more likely than 14.9.

All I know is, visibility in XP12 in the two weeks I have used it, has always been far too low.  From what I have seen in the beta, Laminar are doing wonders for the weather (it has pulled me away from MSFS). I look forward to seeing if they can come up with a better method to portray visibility that better reflects reality outside very dry areas.

2 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

look forward to seeing if they can come up with a better method to portray visibility that better reflects reality outside very dry areas.

The problem is, the further you see, the more detail there is too draw and the greater the hit on fps and system. Which is why so many games like to set fog in distance. So it is what do you want , a tree you can see at 25 miles or a higher FPS. 

Edited June 7, 20251 yr by mjrhealth

57 minutes ago, mjrhealth said:

The problem is, the further you see, the more detail there is too draw and the greater the hit on fps and system. Which is why so many games like to set fog in distance. So it is what do you want , a tree you can see at 25 miles or a higher FPS. 

I don't think XP12 shows trees at 25 miles 😉

3 hours ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

I don't think XP12 shows trees at 25 miles 😉

Yep but you know full well what im getting at.

3 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

Yep but you know full well what im getting at.

Absolutely. However I don't think it is affecting the FPS greatly outside the ring where the autogen is being rendered.

1 hour ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

Absolutely. However I don't think it is affecting the FPS greatly outside the ring where the autogen is being rendered.

It isn’t, that’s why we have a slider for it. I have mine set at high, and it still draws more distance than MSFS, and it still has another notch up to go. 
Outside of the sliders range, I believe no autogen or cars etc  is being drawn. 
 

you can probably do a test. Set manual rather and set unlimited visibility and check your fps. Then set live weather in an area with no cloud but visibility limited by the live weather system and check your FPS. A bit rudimentary yes but it should give an idea. 

Edited June 7, 20251 yr by Ianrivaldosmith

I solved the problem of excessive haze with the plugin HazeAdjust.lua

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/85631-hazeadjust-bloom/

My settings: 1.3 - 1.0 - 1.0

Edited June 7, 20251 yr by efis007

1 hour ago, efis007 said:

I solved the problem of excessive haze with the plugin HazeAdjust.lua

https://forums.x-plane.org/files/file/85631-hazeadjust-bloom/

Oh boy, an absolute game changer - thank you for linking to this script! 😮👍

I love the haze in XP12, but this script allows very subtle changes to the haze.  Exactly what I thought XP12 needed - just a slight reduction over what XP12 injects is perfection!