Above lake Leman - Alps - X-Plane 10

[PascalL]

Hi !

G2xpl and Osm2xpl scenery, both v9 and work fine in XP10.

Robert said he is currently adapting G2xpl for v10, which will be great with much better waters and improved relief. And also v10 autogen ! And Osm2xp will use v10 features too !

[PascalL]

going down to land at Lausanne-Blécherette :

Edited December 19, 2011 by PascalL

[Cameron]

Stunning!

[PascalL]

Thanks Cameron!

[MaidenFan]

That looks awesome! It's great to see V9 stuff transferring over to V10 so well!

[namaui]

These are the first screenshots of 10 that have made me say "wow" out loud.

[Nicola_M]

Yeah, those mountains look really lifelike.

[ARTIK]

Sure those mountains looks great - because of "bad" technology called "garbage orthophotos" ! Personally I still prefer orthos + OSM for the real VFR joy and life-like images. We even don't need XP10 to enjoy such a beauty: XP9 + OSM2XP+REX clouds do the job with fantastic twice XP10 framerate!

regards

arti

[PascalL]

Thanks everyone !

@Arti: I don't fully agree, the orthophotos scenery is greatly enhanced by X-plane 10 engine. HDR has some subtle effect with lighting, but very effective. Farther visibility "opens" the view a lot ! And you could never achieve this effect with clouds in v9. All effects together add a lot to immersion. Also, keep in mind the coastlines and elevation points are still v9 (because the scenery was made in v9). Both are better in v10.

P.S: and last but not least: the water reflections are much, much better !

Edited December 20, 2011 by PascalL

[clavel9]

Pascal, some lovely shots there. I recognise Les Dents du Midi in the last photo of your first post: a feature I know well from a skiing trip to Chatel a few years ago.

Might I ask what your equipment specs and rendering settings are? I have been fiddling with my own rendering settings and have yet to settle on settings I like.

[Nicola_M]

Someone tell me how to get mountains like in the top picture in xp9, now I wasted 14mb downloading osm2xp only to find it only does buildings (thanks Arti).

I don't get mountains looking that realistic in xp9 and wonder how........

[MdMax]

@Nicola_M: this is how mountains look in X-Plane 9:

http://www.flightsim...th-the-Saratoga

@PascalL: Awesome shots ! And +1 ! HDR, lighting, water, clouds, default mesh, many things have been improved a lot in X-Plane 10.

[Nicola_M]

thanks mdmax, mine don't look like that. I sense a day of low altitude mountain flying coming up in the next day......

[ksgy]

Nicola_M: http://x-plane.hu/swiss-vfr/

[Nicola_M]

thanks, I've got Suisse 2004 parts 1 & 2 by Daniel G, but my mountains anywhere don't look like yours. Mine are green all over. The dark ravines just don't show up on mine, but going to have a few flights tonight and see what mine are like and maybe start a thread with pics.

tx

[PascalL]

Hi Nicolas !

Go to http://zonephoto.x-plane.fr/?l=EN and select Switzerland.

careful, these are full tiles at level 16, quite heavy !

I have also made nearly a third of USA myself with G2XPL at level 14 or 15 (not Xp2osm ! )

Now I wil have to start again to have v10 techs included ! (roads and more elevation points)

@Merisi : I'll post my settings after I finish work, stay tuned !

[clavel9]

@Merisi : I'll post my settings after I finish work, stay tuned !

Thank you!

[PascalL]

Ubuntu 11.10 Oneiric 32bits

Intel Quad Q6600

4Gb ram

Geforce GTX 560ti 2Gb

on Port PCIe 1.0 16x (reported as PCIe 8x by Nvidia panel, which is true in the 2.0 standard)

Screen resolution: 1920x1200

No standard AA (I use the HDR AA)

Visibility was 100nm

AI aircrafts: 2

Framerate was all the time between 20 and 45 and no hickups.

Obviously the banwidth is the bottleneck of my system.

I see it if I enable global shadows AND maximize object at the same time. Not surprised, considering the table on this page:

http://www.x-plane.c...ame-rates-pt-1/

In short, roads, forests, objects and shadows use banwidth.

To give you an idea, I can max out (insane !) buildings and roads in Seattle, with very low world distance detail, but without global shadows, and still fly well. That give me an already very satisfying experience, even if global shadow would be very nice. The night and global lighting is not any harder on FPS than day, even with HDR, which is surprising given the complexity of global lighting.

Still one thing: with the scenario above, I use very few clouds. I have yet to dicover how to tune option to get the most consistant FPS with clouds. It's never good to experiment too many things at a time.

In short, don't hesitate to find two or three different setting best adapted to the kind of flights you want to do (ex: "cloudy", "cities", "orthophotos"). For that it's important to understand which part of your system is strong and which is not, and look at the table I linked to to see what feature are ok. Don't try to follow blindly the settings of other persons (not even mine), it won't help you to understand the basics. The article linked above is enlighting, and the basic principle underlined: tune from down up !

Cheers !

P.S: be careful with 4xSSAA HDR option and big number of objects: I had some crashes, probably due to the fact my 32bits system can't allocate enough RAM to X-plane. I'll probably upgrade to Ubuntu 64 soon because of that.

Edited December 21, 2011 by PascalL