purduekev Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 I just started seeing a really weird anomaly - very blocky textures in the water and shoreline: I am seeing this at Juneau, Cordova, Hoonah, and Boweman as you can see, I have not gone through to look at any other airports or shorelines. I have a relatively fresh clean reinstall of FSX, completed just in the last 2 weeks, and I think everything was fine until I just noticed this in the last 2 days - you can see some of my recent screenshots in the Community Screenshots forum where I had pristine water textures at Stewart. I have no idea what is happening now. It appears to be happening at sea level, and its not affecting regular (above sea level) ground textures as far as I can tell. I have clean reinstalled the latest Nvidia drivers, I have run FSX Go with just default FSX.cfg, I have tried all of the different water slider settings, none of it is having an effect. Can you help? Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Goff Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Hi Kevin, What you're seeing is a close up view of lower-res photoreal. This post makes mention of the same thing you're seeing: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/57076-hoonah-issue/?hl=hoonah Pretty much any photoreal source lower than about 50cm in resolution will look fairly blocky up close, especially where water meets land. The water can only be defined in 1px increments and there is no anti-aliasing to speak of when compiling so in the end it turns out looking rough when you get up close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purduekev Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share Posted June 2, 2013 Hi Kevin, What you're seeing is a close up view of lower-res photoreal. This post makes mention of the same thing you're seeing: http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/57076-hoonah-issue/?hl=hoonah Pretty much any photoreal source lower than about 50cm in resolution will look fairly blocky up close, especially where water meets land. The water can only be defined in 1px increments and there is no anti-aliasing to speak of when compiling so in the end it turns out looking rough when you get up close. Hi Alex -- Thanks for your reply! I apologize, I suppose I didn't pick the right keywords to search as I did look for any previous posts before I posted my new topic, honest! Yes, that is exactly what I am seeing. I also did a flyover again of Bowerman and it looks the way it should after all, as does the Stewart coastline by the SPB (the two test cases outside of SAK that I was using). And I put my floatplane in the water at Stewart and the water textures look as they should too. Your explanation makes perfect sense. Is this the case at Juneau Int'l as well? I suppose you guys have done such an impressive job with the SAK airports that I expected the same resolution as the payware airports, which is of course unfair! At least I am not crazy or seeing things, and there is no glitch in my FSX install, so I can breathe a sigh of relief! Thanks for the prompt reply! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Goff Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 No worries! Juneau is also done with photoreal textures but it's 60cm which is a fair bit better than Hoonah's 90cm. Unfortunately for many of the places out in rural Alaska there simply isn't better imagery available! If you find low resolution of Hoonah bothersome up close there are instructions in the thread I linked for disabling the photoreal and seeing the landclass underneath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purduekev Posted June 2, 2013 Author Share Posted June 2, 2013 No worries! Juneau is also done with photoreal textures but it's 60cm which is a fair bit better than Hoonah's 90cm. Unfortunately for many of the places out in rural Alaska there simply isn't better imagery available! If you find low resolution of Hoonah bothersome up close there are instructions in the thread I linked for disabling the photoreal and seeing the landclass underneath. Alex: I tested out the disabled .bgl per the instructions - didn't like it, the Orbx textures are far superior to the default landclass! The only thing that was improved in any way was that I could see the smoothed UTX riverbanks on the tidal streams, but which the Orbx installation covers up of course. If there was a way to combine the smooth UTX stream edges with the Orbx textures, it would be perfect - but I know that is not possible! I just wanted to make sure there was nothing faulty in my installation or with my system. As I said, you guys at Orbx are spoiling us! Thanks for answering my questions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.