timest Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Just can't get enough of this!! Enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxter Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Great comparison, shows just how much effort was put in to this product, Thanks for sharing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biscuit Chucker Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Looks bloody good to me! SE of YHML I think.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Abdey Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Now if only we could have those cloud shadows as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macca22au Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 XGraphics will give them to you. Look in Flight1, its not too expensive. I bought the bundle with Active Sky X the real and themed weather application. Other people swear by Flight Environment x, but there are some really good weather, cloud and ground shadow programs out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Sorry macca, but XG does not provide cloud shadows, at least it didn't last time I used it We can add *static* cloud shadows to FTX if people want them. Not too hard to do, but it means the shadows are "fake" and part of the textures. You would need to switch them in and out depending on the weather being used. i.e. Overcast/broken clouds - switch in the the fake cloud shadows. Clear skies? Switch them out again. Maybe I should poll this and see if there is demand? BTW - nice comparison shots Timbo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mstyles Posted March 16, 2008 Share Posted March 16, 2008 Christian Buchner of TileProxy fame talks about the possibility of dynamic clouds here http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=147&topic_id=270450&mode=full Static clouds shadows would be good too! Can you write a utility that uses SimConnect to get the current cloud coverage and then adds shadows appropriately? Would it work like this? 1) User selects weather in FSX (say "Building Storms") and loads flight. 2) User switches to your utility and it looks at current 3D cloud coverage and writes shadows on FTX textures based on that coverage? 3) User switches back to FSX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mstyles Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Christian Buchner of TileProxy fame talks about the possibility of dynamic clouds here http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=147&topic_id=270450&mode=full I mean "dynamic cloud shadows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heiko Glatthorn Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Great composition Tim ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpax444 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Very nice Tim, makes it very easy to see the difference and the work that has gone into this scenery!! Keep them coming mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Abdey Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 I must say in reply to John's post that I for one would not be interested in seeing static ground shadows - moving clouds, need moving shadows for me, and I don't know how feasible this would be given the way FSX creates and displays clouds, I would imagine there would be a fair performance hit at the very least, and would only every be an approximation of what is happening in the sky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxter Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 I must say in reply to John's post that I for one would not be interested in seeing static ground shadows - moving clouds, need moving shadows for me, and I don't know how feasible this would be given the way FSX creates and displays clouds, I would imagine there would be a fair performance hit at the very least, and would only every be an approximation of what is happening in the sky. I'm not entirely sure that you would notice the lack of movement of the shadows when in the air. Sure if you were in a fixed elevated position looking down at the shadows you would notice it, but in an aircraft...? Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Abdey Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I must say in reply to John's post that I for one would not be interested in seeing static ground shadows - moving clouds, need moving shadows for me, and I don't know how feasible this would be given the way FSX creates and displays clouds, I would imagine there would be a fair performance hit at the very least, and would only every be an approximation of what is happening in the sky. I'm not entirely sure that you would notice the lack of movement of the shadows when in the air. Sure if you were in a fixed elevated position looking down at the shadows you would notice it, but in an aircraft...? Cheers, No, probabaly not, but it would mean some area's of land will always be dark, which would be a shame - if it's something you could turn on or off, then you could chose, and that would be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreddhk Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I was hopeing for DX10 to bring cloud shadows to the ground .. and god rays .. however, as we all know by now, that didn't happen! Hopefully the ace's team have cloud shadowing someplace on the agenda. Would give the virtual world a lot more of an emersive feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slipstream Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I would vote for shadows. I also have Genx for England and the areas that were photographed early, or later, in the day, have nice long shadows and makes a huge difference to the reality and 3D effect. I will grab some screenies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.