rockliffe Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 Apologies for aiming this directly at yourself John, but I think you are likely to be one of the persons qualified to answer my query and who's opinion would be highly respected. There are many posts around the forums about the low quality of ground textures in P3D V4. I personally have done many tests, both trying different tweaks in the cfg. and alternative settings in the P3D settings panel, and I have found it impossible to create the crisp textures that I once enjoyed in FSX. The low quality textures, or certainly what appear like low quality textures, are made even worse with delayed texture loading which has been regularly reported in the simming community. I have also tried the Texture_Size_Exp tweak and have experienced zero improvement. In my own opinion, it would appear that P3D V4 has been designed in such a way so as to display lower resolution textures. Could this be the case? I hope you don't mind me asking you directly, as I know you are more than busy, but could I ask what your opinion is regarding this phenomenon and whether it is something you are aware of? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dow Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 I'm not JV but I will agree that P3DV4 textures are not as crisp as FSX. I suspect this was a deiberate decision by LM to allow other resource hungry areas of the sim to have more. I have just learnt to live with it, and now that I have a 4K monitor running 3840 x 2160 pixels it's not much of an issue. I don't believe there are any tweaks that will work without compromising other important areas of the grahics or sim. Attached are the settings recommended to me by one of the devs here, and I've been happy with the overall performance vs graphics. Note that even with a mid range GTX970, the full 4K resolution still runs at better than 20fps everywhere and often 50 and better over rural areas... and it seems that for most CPUs such as my 4790K, upgrading to a GTX 1070 or 1080 doesn't really add much to FPS or visuals, it's still CPU dependent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockliffe Posted November 5, 2017 Author Share Posted November 5, 2017 6 minutes ago, John Dow said: I suspect this was a deliberate decision by LM to allow other resource hungry areas of the sim to have more. That's more or less my own train of suspicion also John. It would be good to get to the bottom of things though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmb Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 There has been a reply by LM's graphics lead Beau Hollis on a related topic (the last one on page 1) http://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=126479 It might shed some light onto the matter, although (like with some of Beau's postings) it's a bit beyond my comprehension. Kind regards, Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockliffe Posted November 5, 2017 Author Share Posted November 5, 2017 7 minutes ago, pmb said: There has been a reply by LM's graphics lead Beau Hollis on a related topic (the last one on page 1) http://www.prepar3d.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6312&t=126479 It might shed some light onto the matter, although (like with some of Beau's postings) it's a bit beyond my comprehension. Kind regards, Michael Thanks for the link Micahel. I missed that one However, I am still perplexed. As I mentioned above, I have tweaked and tried every setting and beyond, and no matter what I do, the ground textures still seem low resolution. One of the things I always used to like in FSX was being able to fly VFR in a GA aircraft at low altitudes and really enjoy Orbx sceneries. Flying at those same low altitudes is now marred by these low grade textures. To me, they appear siginificantly lower resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelab6 Posted November 5, 2017 Share Posted November 5, 2017 Take a look around ORBX airports using photoreal scenery. The ground textures not using photoreal scenery (out of airport limits) are crisper than around the airports using photoreal....Fly above the scenery where you can see both textures, and you will see the difference... Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockliffe Posted November 5, 2017 Author Share Posted November 5, 2017 6 hours ago, Mikelab6 said: Take a look around ORBX airports using photoreal scenery. The ground textures not using photoreal scenery (out of airport limits) are crisper than around the airports using photoreal....Fly above the scenery where you can see both textures, and you will see the difference... Mike Absolutely Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dow Posted November 6, 2017 Share Posted November 6, 2017 Here's a direct FSX to P3DV4.1 comparison. Identical settings in each sim as far as possible. Each screen shot is about a quarter of the whole view in 3840 x 2160. The FSX graphics have a crispness that is missing from P3D. P3D also displays more saturation in colours. You'll need to click on each pic to get the full size and dispaly the true colours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockliffe Posted November 9, 2017 Author Share Posted November 9, 2017 Thanks for the comparison John. So it's a little easier to compare, I have increased the size and adjusted the contrast so they are both he same. The difference in resolution can easily be seen. Click on the pic to get a bigger pic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Cooper Posted November 9, 2017 Share Posted November 9, 2017 Hello Howard, is this topic going anywhere? Now that it has been established that FSX and P3D do not work the same, what is your next move? Perhaps to the P3D forum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyxx Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 Well I think the foreground roundabout/ road texture part looks like a loading problem. But it seems you have been very selective with what you call Blurry Howard. The only areas in them screen shot that look "better" are the two very small areas pointed out, but everything else is far better in P3D v4. Just look at the road in the middle p3d sharp FSX a mess but you did not highlight that bit Or the hills or everything else but the car park and the roundabout. IMO everything above the line is far better than the blurry textures you see on the right hand side FSX version. I will take the left side v4 all day long. I even think the hill in the foreground left looks a lot better and sharper. Fsx looks rubbish Howard my old friend, I'am sorry I have to point out I think you're obsessing over a roundabout and a car park, just look below and tell me you want the FSX version? over the P3D version. I Don't even get the roundabout you point out above I will post you a low flying shot later at work atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Venema Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 I don't get blurries in P3D at all, not sure why you would have them. Have you tried using the TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 parameter in the [TERRAIN] section of prepar3d.cfg? [TERRAIN] TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8 (256 - default) TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 (512) TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 (1024) Look at the two 4K shots below, the top one is using 256x256 textures which is what you see when you don't click on detailed land textures in the sim GUI. But you know you can go to full native 1024x1024 textures right? This is what all Orbx products ship at as a minimum and forcing the sim to use the native resolution yields remarkable clarity. Take particular notice of the motorways in both shots - no more jagged lines. If you save both images and flip between them you will see the difference. TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8 TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 Downsides? Longer loading times and you need at least a 10GB video card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockliffe Posted November 10, 2017 Author Share Posted November 10, 2017 18 hours ago, Nick Cooper said: Hello Howard, is this topic going anywhere? Now that it has been established that FSX and P3D do not work the same, what is your next move? Perhaps to the P3D forum? Thanks Nick, sure, I have also posted on the P3D forum. I'll discuss things further with the devs over there. cheers. 51 minutes ago, Nyxx said: Well I think the foreground roundabout/ road texture part looks like a loading problem. But it seems you have been very selective with what you call Blurry Howard. The only areas in them screen shot that look "better" are the two very small areas pointed out, but everything else is far better in P3D v4. Just look at the road in the middle p3d sharp FSX a mess but you did not highlight that bit Or the hills or everything else but the car park and the roundabout. IMO everything above the line is far better than the blurry textures you see on the right hand side FSX version. I will take the left side v4 all day long. I even think the hill in the foreground left looks a lot better and sharper. Fsx looks rubbish Howard my old friend, I'am sorry I have to point out I think you're obsessing over a roundabout and a car park, just look below and tell me you want the FSX version? over the P3D version. I Don't even get the roundabout you point out above I will post you a low flying shot later at work atm. I agree Dave, I do tend to be over pedantic when it comes to visuals. I guess that's the consequence of spending my career behind a camera lens The pics have been posted by John Dow, who also agrees that textures no longer appear to be as crisp as in FSX. 27 minutes ago, John Venema said: I don't get blurries in P3D at all, not sure why you would have them. Have you tried using the TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 parameter in the [TERRAIN] section of prepar3d.cfg? [TERRAIN] TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8 (256 - default) TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 (512) TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 (1024) Look at the two 4K shots below, the top one is using 256x256 textures which is what you see when you don't click on detailed land textures in the sim GUI. But you know you can go to full native 1024x1024 textures right? This is what all Orbx products ship at as a minimum and forcing the sim to use the native resolution yields remarkable clarity. Take particular notice of the motorways in both shots - no more jagged lines. If you save both images and flip between them you will see the difference. TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=8 TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 Downsides? Longer loading times and you need at least a 10GB video card. Hi John, thanks for taking the time to reply with a concise explanation, it's very much appreciated. There just seems to be generally, softer and less sharp textures in P3D V4 than I have previously experienced. Not in any particular scenario, but in general. I have in fact tried TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10, as I run with a GTX1080ti, but to be honest, I didn't feel I had seen much of a difference. However, it may have been that I had mis-typed the tweak(?), although the load times were significantly longer . I will do some further testing using TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10 and see the effects. Thanks again, appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyxx Posted November 10, 2017 Share Posted November 10, 2017 22 minutes ago, rockliffe said: I agree Dave, I do tend to be over pedantic when it comes to visuals. I guess that's the consequence of spending my career behind a camera lens The pics have been posted by John Dow, who also agrees that textures no longer appear to be as crisp as in FSX. Well I will respectfully disagree with both of you then Look at the road close to the airport, you don't need to pixel peep to see the difference . I to love my photography. This I found and posted on a topic about 1m textures and 15cm. Now please tell be why you would think this texture loading is not good?. BTW I only have a 1070 so TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 7cm. Orbx OLC "Tack sharp" Howard <you see what I did there? Blinking americans Pin......it's "pin" not "tack" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockliffe Posted November 10, 2017 Author Share Posted November 10, 2017 27 minutes ago, Nyxx said: Well I will respectfully disagree with both of you then Look at the road close to the airport, you don't need to pixel peep to see the difference . I to love my photography. This I found and posted on a topic about 1m textures and 15cm. Now please tell be why you would think this texture loading is not good?. BTW I only have a 1070 so TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=9 7cm. Orbx OLC "Tack sharp" Howard <you see what I did there? Blinking americans Pin......it's "pin" not "tack" Nowt wrong with that! I wonder if there is something going on with my setup or settings. I will do some further tests. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.