Hi Frank,>> Incidentally, I find the new VFR Photographic disappointing. Have you tried it yet? <<
PMFJI, but I am using it, and it is the best thing that ever happened to FS, for me, anyway, and of course in my opinion. For the first time since the attempt to provide accurate VFR scenery for FS4, I am really enjoying VFR flights again, using detailed maps. This scenery is so good that I can identify everything on the 1:50000 O/S maps (the 1¼" to 1 mile ones) and in fact I've invested in a full set of O/S 1:50000 CDs to get Memory Map Navigator to provide such a detailed moving map as I'm exploring.
Flying very low you must expect to be disappointed. To get a resolution high enough for anything below 1500' AGL or so, the sheer size would have been prohibitive. As it is, the whole of England (and maybe Wales?) will use up about 8 GB of HD space. Furthermore, very low flight wil make the scenery appear strange because what looks reasonably 3D from above will look flat too low - naturally the buildings won't stand up. Autogen is no good as it places buildings where no buildings should be, etcetera.
I used to live in Langley, (Bucks as it was then), about 5 m West of EGLL, and taking off from Gary Summons' EGLL (which fits in well) and flying that way, I can recognise my house, school, school playing fields, everything. I enjoy it flying at about 2500-3000 feet.
The cities can look a little rough if they "lose focus". Flying or slewing fast will make this happen. I've found that limiting the FS frame rate down to 20 or even less (I have mine at 15) helps stop this. Also, for nVidia cards, the Omega drivers, set for "quality" rather than performance, really make the scenery look good -- and most ESPECIALLY the countryside. Flying VFR by following roads, railways, even country lanes, referring to maps, is a real joy.
What is it that you find disappointing?
Regards,
Pete