Jump to content

TymK

Members
  • Content Count

    565
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

95 Excellent

About TymK

  • Rank
    Life Member
  • Birthday 01/24/1975

Profile Information

  • Gender:
    Male
  • Location:
    Torun, Poland
  • Interests:
    Freelance translator
    Aviation/flight simulation, military history

Recent Profile Visitors

808 profile views
  1. This is JV's post from a few days ago -- looks like it's coming rather soon
  2. To me, the sharpened ZL16 version looks like a big step back in terms of quality. It might actually be acceptable in the urban areas, but if you look at the first scene, the sharpening completely ruins the blending of terrain and autogen, especially vegetation. Please, please stick to ZL17, or at least offer it as an option...
  3. Thanks Scott, that's reassuring. Looking forward to the release! I'm getting huge performance issues with building shadows in TE GBS, which is why the mention of "custom" autogen objects got me a bit worried... Cheers, Tym
  4. Hi, This is not really a support request but rather a request for technical explanation, so I hope it's OK to post it in this forum... When trying to troubleshoot my performance issues with TE GB South, I noticed that the biggest problem (apart from the huge CPU load caused by scenery loading in comparison to XP) is the performance hit associated with building shadows. Is there an underlying technical difference that causes the custom autogen used in TE to require much more GPU power? While my GTX 1070 Ti might not be the latest and greatest, it generally has no issues with shadows in landclass regions, even at maximum building autogen settings. In TE GBS, however, disabling autogen building shadows is pretty much necessary. I did some comparisons at 30 FPS locked, and the weird thing is that my GPU utilization with building shadows enabled and extreme autogen density is typically less than 70% even in the middle of Portland or SF (as long as the CPU can keep the 30 FPS). However, it often stays pegged at 100% in England with no major cities in view, making it impossible to even reach 30 FPS. I also wonder what other users' experience has been in that respect... Tym
  5. Hi Scott, Since you've mentioned that TE GBS uses custom autogen buildings, do you know if the testing has shown any differences between stock autogen and the custom buildings included in Buildings HD in terms of shadow rendering performance? One thing I've noticed is that the custom autogen included in TE causes a huge performance hit when building shadows are enabled... Tym
  6. Great repaint! Love the second (camouflage in action) shot
  7. Working for me now. Interestingly, I was able to reach the site at around 14:00 UTC using my mobile without issues, but had to reboot my router at home. Looks like it was part of a more widespread issue...
  8. BTW, there's one question I've been meaning to ask: do the POIs for the region include visual objects for the major navaids, such as VOR stations? Tym
  9. Get well soon! I hope you're back on your feet in no time, but don't rush it and let them take good care of you. All the best, Tym
  10. Very nice shots! I have to admit I failed to resist the Orbx/X-Plane deal, too... I had tinkered with the demo in the past, but the default scenery and overall atmosphere/color palette (i.e. the (in)famous 'khaki' effect) always put me off. Now, with Orbx and Xvision in the mix, it's an entirely different experience. As far as Xvision is concerned, I'd say go for it, and I'm looking forward to your new presets I've started with Renault's "Natural Colour" preset and it works very nicely (Yuri's presets included with Xv are a bit too 'contrasty' for my taste, but they do look spectacular). There are also a number of shadow tweaks that can be added using the "FlyWithLua" plugin (a must-have for any serious tinkering ). If you put them in a *.LUA file, they get loaded on every launch. set("sim/private/controls/fbo/shadow_cam_size", 9182.0) <--- this one gets you nice crisp shadows in the VC set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/adhoc/extra_far", 3.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/bias_const", 0.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/bias_slope", 10.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/cockpit_near_adjust", 3.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/csm/far_limit", 8000.0 ) <--- this extends the range of object shadows, you can increase it far more if you have a powerful GPU set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/csm_split_exterior", 4.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/csm_split_interior", 4.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/extra_near", 1.0 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/overlap_ratio", 0.001000 ) set( "sim/private/controls/shadow/total_fade_ratio", 0.000999 ) set("sim/private/controls/skyc/max_shadow_angle",-89) <--- this (together with the next one) gives nice VC lighting at sunrise/sunset, by default X-Plane switches to ugly, uniform orange cockpit lighting when the sun is low set("sim/private/controls/skyc/min_shadow_angle",-90) Oh, and do get the TE GBS demo. The difference in autogen compared to P3D is staggering... The roads, junctions, overpasses, terraced houses, trains etc. are just in another league. I'm still to be convinced how well XP handles vast mountain/forest landscapes due to some shadow issues, so I'm definitely keeping P3D for my North America flying, but for UK-type landscapes XP with Orbx TE is a match made in heaven... Tym
  11. Thanks Mark, that sounds very reassuring. Your settings are actually quite high, so it looks like both the sim and the scenery are really nicely optimised. I guess I know what I'll be doing tonight, although I was originally planning to wait for TE GBS 1.1 and give P3D its last chance... Of course, I'm keeping P3D for landclass regions, but when it comes to orthophoto scenery, XP seems to be in a different league altogether... Oh, and BTW, I know you shared some of your PTA presets. Is your XVision profile available somewhere, too? Cheers, Tym
  12. That's an absolutely stunning set, the colours and atmospherics are mind-blowing... If I may ask... Are the hardware specs in your signature up to date, and if so, what kind of performance are you getting at these settings? I've stuck with P3D as my only sim due to limited time, but my resistance is waning... I've put off any upgrades until I have more free time for simming, so I'm currently running a 1060 6GB and i7 4790K... I wonder if that would give me acceptable performance at 1920x1200 with visuals like yours. Cheers, Tym
  13. I really hope so... While I can achieve acceptable performance (with some compromises, of course) by using reasonable settings, there's really nothing I can do about the loading times. Absolutely, but part of the reason for that was the fact that XP is better suited to this kind of scenery. I'm sure the team are working hard on the optimizations, but there are limits to what can be achieved, especially in terms of autogen. At the same time, it is entirely possible that JV's next preview post will put all my concerns to rest, so I remain (cautiously) optimistic. I agree that this (plus the general excitement for the 'new' platform) may result in a slightly skewed perception. After all, only the Orbx team know the actual figures on TE sales for P3D and XP... I guess we'll have to wait and see what TE GB SP1 brings. I was hoping the P3D announcement would come on Monday along with the XP previews, but it looks like we need to be patient for a few more days...
  14. I may be completely wrong, but I also suspect Orbx are in a bit of an awkward position with the True Earth product line for P3D. While they’ve been very committed to the platform, it is now apparent that P3D – at least in its current form – simply isn’t up to the task (and I’m saying that as a P3D-only user). Unlike XP, which is built to work with ortho and has a very advanced autogen engine, P3D can only display very simple AG, and thus requires a huge number of custom objects to work around these limitations. When you combine that with the object library lookup bug that causes unacceptable load times, and the generally inefficient texture loading, well... you get the picture. A quick look at the screenshot subforum can be very telling as to the popularity of the P3D version vs XP. Of course, the above is pure conjecture on my part, but that’s the kind of vibe I’m getting.
×
×
  • Create New...