Nice work Benny!!!And for those who don't like what you see, download the tools and show us what YOU got!

Very nice, and is a better representation of the housing in the area. This should make the Bostonians happy, then again maybe not, some people are just hard to please.Glen

Hi Benny,Thanks for the work you are putting into this project. It looks very promising for creating scenery for X-Plane. Please keep us informed of updates and keep up the good work. Thanks again.

That sure looks really nice! After mentioned bugs are fixed, with these kind of modifications XPX largest urban areas will be what they should be in no time

Just one question... why isn't this part of the default installation?

Just one question... why isn't this part of the default installation?

+1At the risk of making a complete fool of myself: I thought XPlane 10 scenery was already based on detailed OSM data (among others where no detailed OSM data is available). But looking at your post this seems to be not the case (???).Will the OSM data at some point be included in the standard installation or does every user have to convert data on their own (or download it manually somewhere)?

The problem is that you CAN'T build a global scenery for the world using osm buildings data like i'm using on these screens.The coverage of buildings in open street map differs a lot from on place to another, right now the only place with very good coverage is Europe, and even in Europe some countries are empty.A good exemple is United states, there are only four cities with complete buildings coverage, that's all.So Laminar took the best option to build autogen based on osm data, roads, because roads coverage is very very good, and for the whole wide world.Maybe someday Laminar will update their autogen to use osm buildings data, but even if they do it it will only enhance a few countries and not the whole wide world.Now YOU can add building data to your area of interest , by doing so you will be able to enhance your xplane experience, with my tool or another, and you will also add content to a lot of software and communities that are using open street map data.Sure drawing buildings for a whole city gonna need a LOT of time, but you can team with other people.If you have enough motivation you can also look for governmental sources to import into open street map, i found this about seattle : http://data.seattle....ines/y7u8-vad7? , i think this kind of data can be found for several places in United States, i'm not sure how /if i can inject that into osm, but i'll try.The openStreetMap community is very active and friendly, if you want to contribute you will easily find a lot of help.

At the risk of making a complete fool of myself: I thought XPlane 10 scenery was already based on detailed OSM data (among others where no detailed OSM data is available). But looking at your post this seems to be not the case (???).Will the OSM data at some point be included in the standard installation or does every user have to convert data on their own (or download it manually somewhere)?

"The short answer is: we are using road/rail/powerline data for our road grid and coastline/lake/polygonal river data for water bodies."They're not using OSM buildings. More about this here:http://www.x-plane.com/blog/2011/04/osm-what-data-will-the-global-scenery-use/And here's the topic about the tools you can use:http://forum.avsim.net/topic/355739-improving-the-credibility-of-the-plausible-world/

Then on what data are they defining their default 'plausible' world on??

Then on what data are they defining their default 'plausible' world on??

Plausible means you should not see a road crossing the roof of a building drawn on a ground texture. Austin Meyer explains this in an interview here:http://www.fsbreak.n...x-plane-10.html

Plausible means you should not see a road crossing the roof of a building drawn on a ground texture. Austin Meyer explains this in an interview here:http://www.fsbreak.n...x-plane-10.html

I think I would have to disagree with is concept of 'plausible'. FSX, out of the box is plausible... X-Plane 10 is not.

FSX, out of the box is plausible...

On this page there's a picture called "Default FSX Innsbruck".http://www.avsim.com...t/Innsbruck.htmYou can see building roofs drawn on the ground (default city texture). On top of that you see buildings with shapes that can't match the ground textures, and roads crossing the building roofs drawn on the ground. You can even see 3D trees on top of building roofs. Is this plausible ?

On this page there's a picture called "Default FSX Innsbruck".http://www.avsim.com...t/Innsbruck.htmYou can see building roofs drawn on the ground (default city texture). On top of that you see buildings with shapes that can't match the ground textures, and roads crossing the building roofs drawn on the ground. You can even see 3D trees on top of building roofs. Is this plausible ?

No worse than what X-Plane's currently creating in XP10. Bridges floating in mid-air... etc. In other words... one can always find exceptions of specific issues... but that wasn't my point... and I think you actually know that.In FSX all the airports have plausible design... as in most of the runways and taxiways and aprons are in place as well as important buildings. In X-Plane... not so much.In FSX all the landclass layout is such that it recognizes (for the most part) the difference between a town, a city and a metropolis and the buildings displayed show that. In X-Plane... not really.In FSX there are a great deal of visual landmarks (used for VFR flight) in place. In X-Plane... not really.Is FSX perfect... heck no, but at $50 it offers more accuracy and detail in default scenery than X-Plane offers for $80.

Bridges floating in mid-air... etc.

You're right, sometimes you can see bugs. You're probably talking about Brooklyn Bridge. We saw screen shots like this one.It's not easy to draw up to 3 bridge/road layers like you can see on this real picture. I hope they'll find a solution.

Benny_,Have to admire what you have accomplished but looking at some of the pics, the street intersections are somewhat weird and streets in general in residential areas seem wider than one would expect.Is there a way around these ?If not, can your tool extract only the building and object data from the OSM data and create the dsf file with the exclusion zone clause(s) as appropriate, i.e. excluding the street or other vector data ?I should try to become familiar with your tool.