manuthie

It sure looks nice. Every increase in variation is much appreciated. Please post more screenshots since I am not at home this entire week and cant check for myself ^_^.

Flying in X-Plane with real weather turned on.

Well - obviously those are taken at late evening close to when the sun sets. That is the time where things tend to get duller than in bright daylight. Not quite as dull as midnight but duller than noon. Its called dawn ^_^. That said I have to agree that X-Plane often is a bit duller than I would like. It seems to be a bit less dull in HDR mode though. No. 4 is nice :smile:.

Thanks everyone for your nice comments. It's g2xpl for the most part.

Area around Grindelwald

From http://developer.x-p...ng-two-changes/: Now that sound great. Looking formward to beta 4 :smile:.

... around Stuttgart - since fast isn't an option with this plane anyway :smile:.

I used the latest beta (10.20 Beta 2) but the 32 bit version (which doesn't really matter, since memory usage was slightly below 2gb). Resolution was 1920 x 1200 and settings where almost maxed out (everything on max) except number of cars: "Kansas Residential" HDR anti-aliasing: "4x SSAA+FXAA" water reflection detail: "default" cloud detail: "100%" AI Traffic: "none" I did a little investigation today. For all the following figures I tried to use the same spot and viewing direction. First I used the same settings that where used for the screenshots above which gave me about 9.5 fps. I then reduced settings a bit (number of cars: "none" instead of "Kansas Residential", HDR anti-aliasing: "FXAA" instead of "4x SSAA+FXAA", shadow detail: "overlay" instead of "global (melt your GPU)") and fps went up to about 28. After this I updated my graphics card drivers to the latest 12.11 Beta 8 and tried again. With the higher settings I got about 11.5 fps and with the lower settings fps went up to about 31. So indeed the latest beta driver seems to results in slightly improved performance. With the beta drivers I then checked how much performance penalty these three settings had when enabled individually. With traffic set to "Kansas Residential" instead of "none" fps went from 31 down to 22 (I didn't expect traffic to have that much of an influence - that sure will stay off in future). With HDR anti-aliasing set to "4x SSAA+FXAA" instead of "FXAA" fps went down from 31 to 18.5. With shadow detail set to "global (melt your GPU)" instead of "overlay" fps went down from 31 to 20. Please keep in mind: the fps figure does change quite a bit even when the view isn't moved - so all figures are average values and might be a little higher or a little lower at times. Since I used clear weather fps will be lower if there are clouds. The plane was standing on the ground while I was testing so fps might be lower if the plane is actually flying - not sure how much of an impact that will have.

Playing around with scenery some more ...

I Haven't tried the latest beta drivers but sure will check them. How trees are places ... I have no idea actually. I used this OSM file but I don't know if it contains forests or if the forests are from default scenery. MdMax might be able to answer that as he seems to have a lot of expericen with OSM scenery.

Frames where somewhere between 6fps and 10fps. My computer is an Intel i5 2500K with HD7870 graphics card and 16GB ram (but ram was not the bottle neck here - only about 2GB where needed) using Windows 7. Certainly not high end but not the bottom end as well. Don't know if Nvidia-Cards are better for handling something like this.

Near Stuttgart (EDDS).

Unfortunately my computer is not able the handle this with a usable frame rate (at least at the settings these screenshots where taken). But it's still nice for some impressive screenshots :biggrin:.

My guess is that if pilots are there or not is controlled by a plugin. And since 32 bit plugins wont run on 64 bit the plugin cant tell the pilots to move out.

Yay - got it already. Don't know if its a bug, but in the Phantom F-4 in 3d cockpit mode I see no clouds. If I go to external view with shift+4 then clouds are there. Is this just me or can someone confirm this?

Radeon HD 7870

Hm - fps have dropped quite a bit on my machine. My impression is that in turn shadows in the cockpit look better now.

Edit: Image deleted as requested ... Well - you must be refering to this one ^_^

It seems it is only distributed via email. For details see http://forums.x-plan...topic=59170&hl=. I only got it recently and think results are rather mixed. Sometimes I feel that autogen (right side) is actually the better option

Ok - I did a quick test in X-Plane with g2xpl. Maybe not as nice as your simsavvy version but certainly better than X-Plane default. X-Planes default textures are not all bad though. I think my area is represented rather nicely.

Wow - those screenshots are without any doubt the best I have seen from X-Plane so far. This thing will be awesome. It's worth to have a look at the rest of the screenshots at http://truscenery.wo...the-ground-up/. Nothing beats high res photo textures :biggrin: .

This seems to be a similar approach to OSM2XP. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dS_Z5fPkuA8 They have some more screenshots on their website http://xht-labs.com/prj_xht.htmExtremely nice artwork - X-Plane 10 never looked more plausible :(.

My understanding from reading http://developer.x-plane.com/2011/08/dsf-gets-raster-data/ was, that in v10 this approach had changed. Maybe I got that wrong?

Wow - that was fast. Thank you very much :( .

Could someone show a few images of the alps using this hd mesh and tree enhancements? The area around Grindelwald / Eiger, Mönch, Jungfrau / Aletsch Glacier and maybe the Matterhorn would be nice :(.