Do you like photoreal sceneries?

[windrunner]

Many photoreal sceneries has appeared in the last time (pay and freeware). I am not sure if I like them or not. It is certainly a different experience. The only photoreal I have installed is the Canaries Island (free at http://www.canarysim.com); it's good to start. These guys did an incredible job, and they certainly deserves a good beer! There are many valleys and riffs to explore.

Like them or not? judge for yourself.

La Palma airport





The islands: a sort of lunar landscape.









This particular scenery is really nice. But I did not installed any other photoreal scenery, I think I am not "psichologically" prepared yet...time for an step beyond?

[leylandspurr]

I think they have their place, but it depends on what height you fly - tree-top huggers like me prefer 3D objects, even if they aren't true-to-life, but once you get over 1,500-2,000 feet then the realism of photoreal scenery starts to override the lack of 3D effect. Only other reservation I have is that localised ones usually have an abrupt edge where they end.
It's easy enough to load these photoreal scenery items and disable them temporarily if you want to fly low, so there's plenty of room for both!
Leyland

[asw22ble]

I can't stand to fly much in non-photoscenery anymore - default scenery and even the likes of Vancouver+, Mistyfjords just doesn't look real.
When you add autogen to photoscenery like the guys at vfrfrance and the UK vfraddons project it becomes so much more real - and you can actually fly VFR realistically. It's the way to go.

[314clipper]

They do look great from a few thousand feet up, but to me, overall it isn't worth the tradeoff. I've got photoreal sceneries for Dallas/Ft. Worth and Southern California in the USA (MegaScenery payware), plus a couple of freeware PR sceneries for Italy and Japan. They're nice for taking realistic screenshots or trying to pick out familiar landmarks, but I don't like the appearance at low altitude or along the scenery border. And they take f...o...r...e...v...e...r to load. It is really just a matter of personal preference and how you use your sim. Having said that, I think I'll have to go get that Canary Islands scenery --- looks too good to pass up! ;D

[windrunner]

thanks guys for your interest. I wonder if coming flight sims versions will be only photoreal, but then, how water will be rendered? and the skyes?; I'm not sure FSX will change rendered landscapes for photoreal, may be it'll remain, like today, subject for some particular zones.

I've seen there are many photoreal sceneries, more than I expected (I was not very interested untill today), and they all deserve a try, if you really like them. I agree with you, it depends of the sort of flight: for a bush, the rendered may be best. If you go up and fast, the vision of these islands is incredible. I've seen some pics of the France vfr and its impressive.

I think if you live in a place where a photoreal scenery is availaible, you'll go for it with no doubts at all. May be that's the main interest of this products, to make people "feel at home" . Oh, when will someone will make a photoreal of my Alps?

[Kofi]

I REALLY used to love them but now that I've got Ground Environment Pro, I'm much MORE selective of photo-real VFR scenery...

[bhk]

The only p/real I have also happens to be the Canaries.....and, in agreement with other comments here, from a decent height they look great.

I don't need p/real to be able to suspend disbelief, even when flying in those areas with which I am very familiar.

Bruce