Where would TEXTURE_MAX_LOAD be most noticable?

Hi @all,

 

as the title says, I am looking for spots where I would most probably notice the differences when setting TML to 1024 instead of 4096.

 

I never bothered with this option, set it to 4096 once and left it there. Until now I did not have any problems - but yesterday I bought the HD DC-10 and this thing is eating memory like crazy. So I started with TML, setting it to 1024. Improved things a little in VAS (100-150 MB). But I am hard pressed to see any difference in sim depiction. So I started to wonder where I would notice it most, flicking through PMDG 737, Coolsky DC-9, QW 146, all of which I have HD textures for. Faild to see any difference, even when I zoomed in on the panels.

 

Am I missing something? Or is one of the other cfg settings overriding this value anyway? My FSX Gold is on DX10 with the Fixer, heavily tweaked.

I normally keep mine at 1024. I've tried 2048 and even 4096 and didn't see much difference other than framerate drop. Some developers claim their Hi-Def textures for

their aircraft are best seen in the higher load range.

 

This is David's Hi-Def textures for the C-47 using 1024.

 

Hi Zippy, this makes me scratch my head. I have quite a few of those HiDef planes, and clouds and whatnot. I know I had a reason why I set 4096 and I keep thinking 'clouds', but I'm just not so sure anymore. Maybe Rex SoftClouds just look the same on each setting?

You'd have to be very close to the aircraft to see the 4096 mip level, like eyepoint within 2-3 meters, you'll notice differences looking at things like static vents and door hinges in the textures. If you move the eyepoint very close to the aircraft and zoom out with the minus key you'll see the 4096px mip level give way to the 2048 providing you have a means of telling them apart like this:

 

Normal zoom, the (unmarked) 4096px mip is showing on the right aileron, where "2048" begins to fade in moving leftward is where the 2048px mip starts to load. That's how close you'd need to be to see a difference between TML=4096 and TML=2048.

http://www.cat-tamer.com/flightsim/atchmnts/mip_test04.jpg

 

Now when you press the minus key a couple times you see "2048" move rightward onto the entire right wing, the 4096px mip has completely given way to 2048 and you can see "1024" on the opposite wing which means at that distance the 2048 mip is giving way to the 1024px mip.

http://www.cat-tamer.com/flightsim/atchmnts/mip_test03.jpg

 

Here's the same shot with TML=1024 in the .cfg

http://www.cat-tamer.com/flightsim/atchmnts/mip_test02.jpg

 

This is the texture I used for the test

http://www.cat-tamer.com/flightsim/atchmnts/mip_test01.jpg

 

Some developers force HD by leaving mips out of the textures, then TML=1024 for example has no effect, the sim has no choice but to load the full 4096 px texture. They do this so they don't have to require the user to manually edit the .cfg (TML=4096).

 

REX soft clouds are 512px so there would be no reason to have TML greater than 512 for them alone.

Hi Zippy, this makes me scratch my head. I have quite a few of those HiDef planes, and clouds and whatnot. I know I had a reason why I set 4096 and I keep thinking 'clouds', but I'm just not so sure anymore. Maybe Rex SoftClouds just look the same on each setting?

 

You know, it's a real easy test to try! I would try 1024 for 1 day with as many flights and different aircraft you feel up to flying. The next day I would try 2048 and then crank it up to 4096 and see if you notice.

 

Some developers force HD by leaving mips out of the textures, then TML=1024 for example has no effect, the sim has no choice but to load the full 4096 px texture. They do this so they don't have to require the user to manually edit the .cfg (TML=4096).

 

REX soft clouds are 512px so there would be no reason to have TML greater than 512 for them alone.

 

Hi Jim, many thanks for your effort, appreciate it!

 

I guess the last paragraph is why I'm left wondering. I have an almost pure payware hangar, and I suspect that PMDG, McPhat and QW/HD do the forcing of TML as you describe. I can only name one plane off the top of my head that does not do this, but requires the setting anyway: the FSL Concorde. She modifies the TML when the addon is installed.

 

But as I don't do much "watching-my-own-plane-from-the-outside" anyway, I wouldn't notice.

 

For me it would only be critical if it degrades scenery, cockpit textures or clouds.

You know, it's a real easy test to try! I would try 1024 for 1 day with as many flights and different aircraft you feel up to flying. The next day I would try 2048 and then crank it up to 4096 and see if you notice.

 

 

Hi Zippy, yes my thoughts exactly - turn it down and see what happens. But. For me this is more like 2 flights per weekend, so I would like to just trust in the right setting, because I don't know if I will notice anyway.

Maybe I am getting this wrong. I also have my settings at 4096, and always thought that this particular setting affected how textures on the ground looked in photoreal or payware scenery like airports. So, from what I am reading here, does 1024, 2048, 4096, affect only airplane textures?

Maybe I am getting this wrong. I also have my settings at 4096, and always thought that this particular setting affected how textures on the ground looked in photoreal or payware scenery like airports. So, from what I am reading here, does 1024, 2048, 4096, affect only airplane textures?

 

Hi Annber, good question, I wonder about this too. I have played with these settings a bit, and honestly, I don't see any difference between 4096 and 1024 using MegaSceneryEarth photoreal scenery and Aerosoft Bergamo. If I understood Jim Robinson's post correctly, the farther away from mipped textures you are, the lower the resolution will be anyway, so you will only notice the difference close up. How close is the real question - an arm's length? 1000 ft? And if the textures are not mipped, it might not make a difference anyway, they are loaded as they are, right? Otherwise the Sim would probably have to scale the texture like a graphic design software does, when you resize a picture. Not sure if this works that way??

Hi nuitkati,

Not sure if this helps, but here are some relatively close-up, unedited exterior pics of Dino's F14 with my TML setting at 2048. I chose the middle-ground when I took these a while ago, but usually now run at 1024.

 

CLICK IMAGES TO ENLARGE

 

I feel the detail is pretty good and can't imagine it would be much better, or noticeable, at a higher setting. Ground shadows are off.

 

Hope this helps,

 

E-Buzz :pilot:

Maybe I am getting this wrong. I also have my settings at 4096, and always thought that this particular setting affected how textures on the ground looked in photoreal or payware scenery like airports. So, from what I am reading here, does 1024, 2048, 4096, affect only airplane textures?

 

I think it's anything that uses "powers of two" mip-mapped textures. That can be aircraft or scenery objects, probably autogen trees and houses, the airport vehicles, road vehicles, etc. providing a person had larger 3rd party "HD" textures installed for those.

 

In the case of photoreal (and LC textures?) I believe that would fall under texture resolution (just beneath mesh resolution in the scenery settings) where you can set 30cm, 15cm, etc. I would guess that a texture resolution setting of 30cm would limit an LOD18 photoreal to LOD17 for example, much like a TML setting of 1024 limits a 2048 px texture to the 1024 px mip.

 

Jim

@E-Buzz:

 

Many thanks for the pictures. It is not often that I am so close to the outside of my planes, so 1024 should work fine. What remains to be seen is, what impact it has on scenery and clouds (soft or 'hard' ones). Still testing, unfortunately I don't have much time.

 

@ all:

Question: using mipped textures will decrease memory load. But won't it degrade the sims performance, when it has to reload texture sets based on the distance I am looking at them? The reason I'm asking this are my payware airports (mostly Aerosoft). For a long time now I had the nagging feeling, that custom textured buildings have a large impact on my sim's performance - could this be due to mipped/unmipped or TML too high? I am quite a way away, so I suspect it would be the lower resolution showing anyway. I wonder if having to choose which texture to pick, actually slows down the sim. If that is the case, then re-mipping textures a suggested in some guides out there will indeed free up memory - but at the cost of performance. But then again, loading and accessing large textures will take some time also. So the best course of action would be to resize the textures, not mipping them?