X-Plane 10 HD Scenery Mesh released!

[alpilotx 505]

I have just made available the experimental X-Plane 10 HD Mesh Scenery (as freeware). It covers these regions (screenshots are in the gallery on my page - or posted here in previous threads):

• European Alps and Pyrenees (and all land in between)
• USA West (Rockies, Grand Canyon … you name it)
• Alaska
• Canada West

PLEASE: READ ALL THE INFORMATION ON THE DOWNLOAD PAGE BEFORE YOU START! There are quite some things to consider, before you start testing this scenery. I am in no way liable if you blow up your machine!Here is the direct link to the info/download page: http://www.alpilotx....d-scenery-mesh/(it also contains a little bonus - an experimental, dense forest replacement ;) )Previous threads about this topic:http://forum.avsim.n...hots-alaska-hd/http://forum.avsim.n...-scenery-shots/

[MdMax 233]

:( Thank you very much !!!

[alpilotx 505]

Thanks for adding it to x-plane.fr :( !And guys, please don't kill the filehoster just now :( !

[greggerm 312]

Any chance of issuing a set which would work in the demo?Editing: Looks as though I could download just that section of the scenery up in the pacific northwest... let me amend my question then...Will this work with the demo? :)-Greg

[Comanche 417]

Awesome work! Thanks!!!!Rob

[alpilotx 505]

Will this work with the demo? :)

Yes, it should work with the Demo as the Demo already has all the artwork downloaded ... and these are "just" extra DSFs that will use that artwork. Just download one of the smaller packs (Alaska has a few "smaller" ones along the coast), and you can quickly test it.

[manuthie 242]

Could someone show a few images of the alps using this hd mesh and tree enhancements? The area around Grindelwald / Eiger, Mönch, Jungfrau / Aletsch Glacier and maybe the Matterhorn would be nice :(.

[alpilotx 505]

Ok, I added some Switzerland Shots (should cover all the regions you asked for) to this gallery (beginning with 101 are the new shots!):https://picasaweb.google.com/101666907909842492197/XPlane10SceneryExperimentsHave fun :-)

[manuthie 242]

Wow - that was fast. Thank you very much :( .

[N1G 88]

So what is the default mesh resolution, and what is the resolution of the new stuff?Bob

[wb5okj 26]

Downloaded the new mesh for the United States, haven't done Alaska yet. Haven't decided whether to download the forests or not. I keep my trees mostly sparse anyway.Looks pretty good, easy on the frame rates, didn't change my framerates at all if any. Did a test run out of the Los Angeles basin to Victorville via the Interstate15 corridor. Looked pretty real, ahem, plausible. I-15 run right up the side of El Capitan, just as it was supposed to. Was a bit disappointed that the Highway Patrol scales weren't showing up in the sim. :( Actually if you knew where they were supposed to be, you could spot the area. Same with the 18 wheeler pull off on the soutbound side on top of the rim, wasn't actually there, but you could see where it was supposed to be, which all in all seems pretty good to me.Next went to Telluride, again things looked good, no difference that I could tell in my frame rates. All in all, it looks like apilotx hard work, was worth the effort.All of the above, is strictly my opinion, I'm sure some people who shall remain nameless, will be able to pick the mesh to death. :(

[alpilotx 505]

So what is the default mesh resolution, and what is the resolution of the new stuff?

Well, its not easy to give an "exact" resolution in X-Plane, as it - contrary to MS - uses an irregular mesh approach. This means, that it makes triangles larger where there is less detail (usually in flat/flatter areas) and smaller where there is more detail to depict (the mountains). And it is our scenery generation tool that "decides", where to put what triangles. I do only give it some parameters to steer its behavior ... For example, I have almost tripled the point pool it can use (which is only kind of an upper limit), and cut max allowed triangle by a factor of 2-3 (this is again kind of a guideline for the tool) etc. ... You could also just compare the size of the DSFs (which is only a rough indicator) which has approximately doubled with the HD Mesh.

[manuthie 242]

Well, its not easy to give an "exact" resolution in X-Plane, as it - contrary to MS - uses an irregular mesh approach....

My understanding from reading http://developer.x-plane.com/2011/08/dsf-gets-raster-data/ was, that in v10 this approach had changed. Maybe I got that wrong?

[alpilotx 505]

My understanding from reading http://developer.x-p...ts-raster-data/ was, that in v10 this approach had changed. Maybe I got that wrong?

You got it wrong :( . But of course, there IS a difference between how XP9 worked, and how XP10 works.We still have a - irregular(!) - triangle base mesh, just like we always had. And the triangles "know" about what TERs are assigned to them (so they know, where to look for art assets --> textures). And the triangle mesh is not a continuous big mesh, but rather a gigantic patchwork of many little meshes which do overlap (and along the overlap seams, we can create the transition effects between textures).But, what has changed, is the fact, that the triangle mesh does not have elevation information encoded at its node (nor does it have normals at those points). The elevation information now comes from the integrated raster data (thats where it comes into play). You can imagine the base mesh like a big, flat - patchwork - blanket, which is then "thrown" over the raster elevation data. This way, the elevation finally mimics the elevation structure of the underlying data. BUT, the triangle structure - this is where my HD mesh improves it - can still only mimic the raster data at its detail level! So, just by replacing the raster data in the DSF, you can't improve the final mesh resolution as you see it in the sim (that is limited by the triangle structure!).Why we did this? Two reasons. First, it save space, as encoding elevation and normal at each node takes much more space, than having one, compact blob of raster data (which compresses well) for it (at the cost, that the sim now needs to recreate elevation info and normals for the triangle mesh at load time - but which is not very high). The second is a plan - we hope, we can implement it at some point - is, to use hardware tessellation to refine the triangle mesh at runtime. Which means, breaking up the triangle structure on the graphics card ... so it becomes much more "detailed" ... and can thus mimic the underlying raster data more precisely.I hope this helps a little bit to understand the topic (you might as well read an interview, which xplane10s blog did with me some months ago, where I go in some details on this topic: http://xplane10.wordpress.com/2011/12/10/developer-interview-andras-fabian-mr-x-terrain/ )

[N1G 88]

Thanks alpilotxI guess comparison shots would be the only way to really tell.Bob