Finally! Photo scenery with autogen

[FlyIce 354]

That said : STOP doing ZL19, in 99.9% of the cases it is purely useless, a true waste of everything.

Most of the time :

- optical resolution is close to ZL18 at most, sometimes even ZL17,anything higher is just oversampling.

- above a few hundred feets lower mipmaps will take the place anyway, so your top resolution will

not even be loaded.

For VFR use ZL17 with notches of ZL18 in the places you know you will fly very low. For anything

above 2000ft ZL16 is already almost optimal. For airliner altitude anything above ZL14/ZL15 is simply not loaded as a mipmap.

 

 

Good to know that. I'll stop downloading ZL19 - I just didn't know better and automatically assumed ZL19 is always the best.

 

Again, thank you Oscar for this wonderful tool. It has totally transformed my experiences on sim flying. 

 

By the way, it's possible for you to make a Ortho4P3D program or a way to convert Ortho4XP sceneries for use with P3D? 

[hjsmuc 393]

Interesting that the only party which wants to make a profit with photosceneries has started the legal argument in this thread. I am refraining from commenting on the legal terms though, while it is my profession I am only here as a private individual in the pursuit of his hobby.

 

+1 to the genius Oscar. 

[Oscar Pilote 22]

In case of added value there is nothing wrong with trying to make a profit, we all need to make a living from something.

But I replied mostly because the argument about "collective efficiency" can be rather counter-intuitive.

The point regarding copyright related to Digital Globe or other license holders remains certainly true, I feel much more comfortable when I find a good open-data imagery.

 

I think apes don't use +1 or -1 either, that was invented by those barbarians of the Roman empire in the circus :-)

Season greetings to all of you

[hjsmuc 393]

 

 

I think apes don't use +1 or -1 either, that was invented by those barbarians of the Roman empire in the circus :-)

 

Well, the apes were not introduced by me in this thread :-) I just wanted to compliment you on your excellent work. Without it, I wouldn't use X-Plane at all. Another thread going south as it looks, time for a break indeed.

 

Joyeux Noel!

[pmb 5,137]

Apes were introduced by me. I feel guilty, I already apologized and would like to apologize once more.

 

Michael

[hjsmuc 393]

Don't worry Michael. This community is thin skinned. It disappoints me regularly that instead of enjoying what we have we discuss things to death. All opinions should be considered equally, but heck, that doesn't work anywhere.

[UltimateVFR 1]

Interesting that the only party which wants to make a profit with photosceneries has started the legal argument in this thread. I am refraining from commenting on the legal terms though, while it is my profession I am only here as a private individual in the pursuit of his hobby.

 

+1 to the genius Oscar. 

 

What profit?  I've literally spent $20,000 or more developing the stuff through fully legal channels and I have eaten that cost personally and I've had like 4 sales in the month that doesn't even cover the cost to pay the electric bill, it costs $100 a month in electricity to generate, $200 a month to host data on a server, and costs money to deliver files to users, I've had to invest over $7,500 in computer hardware alone.  The price reflects the true cost of accessing data legally.  I have a full time job that pays my bills, Ultimate VFR is in no way making me money, it's just covering costs.

 

Not starting any arguments, it's a fact that pulling stuff from bing, yahoo and google maps is in violation of their terms of service.  I personally won't use such services because having integrity and honor is way more important to me than being self serving in my life or doing something that is dishonest.  There are a lot of people in the FS community that feel the same way, they want to enjoy flying and simulation while operating through honest channels.

 

I'm also a pilot as well as a film professional who has worked on multi million dollar films and tv series, and I personally will not tarnish my name by doing something wrong.  All the stuff I do is professionally color graded to a cinematic level, I've spent 8 years developing high definition water maps that no one else has done, and was the first to start developing USA wide photo scenery as well as night lighting with light pools on the terrain long before anyone else in the sim community.

 

I was a beta tester for Microsoft Flight Simulator X as well as being involved with the development of two new upcoming Flight Simulators.  I do need to put food on the table and I'm not going to go spending $300+ per month + download costs which would cost thousands of dollars to give stuff away for free out of my own pocket.  So Ultimate VFR has a cost because of the need to recoup those expenses so the community can have access to data via legal means without resorting to breaking the TOS for Google, Bing and Yahoo.

 

 Peace & Friendship

[hjsmuc 393]

I said intending to make a profit. Apologies if you took this as an offense. There is an avsim rule that discussions on EULAS are not allowed. I therefore kindly ask a moderator to close this topic.

[UltimateVFR 1]

I said intending to make a profit. Apologies if you took this as an offense. There is an avsim rule that discussions on EULAS are not allowed. I therefore kindly ask a moderator to close this topic.

 

Incorrect, discussions regarding busting EULA's is not allowed such as the software that was mentioned before that busts the EULA of Google, Bing and Yahoo Maps was what I was responding to before.  Those posts are the ones that should be addressed, not my response to them.  I totally welcome AVSIM staff to moderate this thread.

 

The AVSIM TOS is follows:

 

Piracy, Key Sharing, Link Sharing, EULA Busting, etc.: Any message, post or topic heading that appears to advocate or perpetuates piracy, shares cracked software, links to or other like material, advocates avoidance of or contravening of End User License Agreements (EULAs) or can be interpreted as approval of piracy or EULA "busting", will be immediately removed and the poster banned. Piracy of software destroys the basis of our hobby and AVSIM enforces anti-piracy policies strictly. If you are a pirate, advocate piracy, or use pirated material, do not register. We place EULA busting in the same category.

 

I'll leave the rest up to moderators.

[Christopher Low 5,352]

So, does this mean that use of Ortho4XP is technically illegal?

[Manny 1,293]

I am getting old.. I saw this thread (page 1) and bought PR, Texas, Hawaii and Arizona.

I then read this thread  (page 2 and 3)  and I see my own comment about how it looked in PR and Arizona. So I have bought before but completely forgot..for PR and AZ. LOL :) It's not expensive, so its ok.

In any case, It's a mixed bag... in some areas the Autogen is sparce and some areas its very nice.

Here is just off of Houston. KIAH. Look at the autogens..Amazing. IT looks almost as good Orbx. Photoscenery is HD Houston MEgascenery.City

 

[iangbusa 2]

Sorry to chime in here with my 2 cents and maybe a little too late to add to the discussion...

I'm the developer of nuvecta Landscapes and just want to clarify a couple of points on it and on comments the thread. BTW I once got accused by a moderator of advertising (I think suggesting I'd started the thread as someone else and then replying). I have no intention of advertising. The discussion seems to have been going a while and others have commented on many different products.

I completely understand and agree with UltimateVFR's comments. I'm in the same boat. I also spent literally thousands of dollars and hours producing the autogen add-ons for over 3 million square miles. The underlying "structure" of the photo-scenery does not control or interact in any way with the autogen. That has to be created and positioned entirely separately. To have autogen in roughly the right place to match the real-world geographic layout of photo-scenery means I have to have a lot of real-world data. That's not cheap. Free data doesn't have enough information, particularly in the USA. Where data is missing I had to develop a few "semi-intelligent" algorithms, using what data I could find, to generate and to place items and still look reasonable.

I stayed clear of producing the photo-scenery because that literally does cost tens of thousands. For the 3 million sq. miles it would cost more than my house probably - assuming it's all accessible even. Like UltimateVFR says, there's very little (if any) money to be made (unless you're OrbX or aerosoft). I've pretty much done this for the hobby, as a user myself looking for a product that didn't exist, for other enthusiasts and, at the same time, tried to cover some of the cost.

Because I don't make it, I have no control over the photo-scenery or its appearance. Doing that over the whole USA would take years. As it is, the autogen took me over a year (for Landscapes, Treeline took the same length of time). Similarly, because I don't include replacement models or textures, I have no control over the "look" of the autogen. It uses whatever you have installed in your simulator (stock FSX, FSW, P3D or add-ons like Zinertek etc). As to trees on roads etc., obviously oddities crop up in a project this size. I try to catch them in QA testing but can't (much as I like to) fly over the whole country! That's why I rely on user feedback. I'm very open to it and try to get corrections out as soon as I can.

I've now moved on to other types of scenery (mostly vector based) that means I'm not dependent on other products like photo-real. However, there'll always be ways to improve (and correct) what's already there.

Thanks and enjoy you're flying!!

ian

PS Don't buy both Treeline and Landscapes (if you're thinking of it). Landscapes, with buildings and more trees, completely replaces Treeline and it would be a waste of money. Also, the Landscapes "beta" samples in RI, DE, and HI are nothing like the finished product. That's what happens when it takes more than a year to finish a product!

[kevinfirth 1,393]

42 minutes ago, iangbusa said:

Sorry to chime in here with my 2 cents and maybe a little too late to add to the discussion...

I'm the developer of nuvecta Landscapes and just want to clarify a couple of points on it and on comments the thread. BTW I once got accused by a moderator of advertising (I think suggesting I'd started the thread as someone else and then replying). I have no intention of advertising. The discussion seems to have been going a while and others have commented on many different products.

I completely understand and agree with UltimateVFR's comments. I'm in the same boat. I also spent literally thousands of dollars and hours producing the autogen add-ons for over 3 million square miles. The underlying "structure" of the photo-scenery does not control or interact in any way with the autogen. That has to be created and positioned entirely separately. To have autogen in roughly the right place to match the real-world geographic layout of photo-scenery means I have to have a lot of real-world data. That's not cheap. Free data doesn't have enough information, particularly in the USA. Where data is missing I had to develop a few "semi-intelligent" algorithms, using what data I could find, to generate and to place items and still look reasonable.

I stayed clear of producing the photo-scenery because that literally does cost tens of thousands. For the 3 million sq. miles it would cost more than my house probably - assuming it's all accessible even. Like UltimateVFR says, there's very little (if any) money to be made (unless you're OrbX or aerosoft). I've pretty much done this for the hobby, as a user myself looking for a product that didn't exist, for other enthusiasts and, at the same time, tried to cover some of the cost.

Because I don't make it, I have no control over the photo-scenery or its appearance. Doing that over the whole USA would take years. As it is, the autogen took me over a year (for Landscapes, Treeline took the same length of time). Similarly, because I don't include replacement models or textures, I have no control over the "look" of the autogen. It uses whatever you have installed in your simulator (stock FSX, FSW, P3D or add-ons like Zinertek etc). As to trees on roads etc., obviously oddities crop up in a project this size. I try to catch them in QA testing but can't (much as I like to) fly over the whole country! That's why I rely on user feedback. I'm very open to it and try to get corrections out as soon as I can.

I've now moved on to other types of scenery (mostly vector based) that means I'm not dependent on other products like photo-real. However, there'll always be ways to improve (and correct) what's already there.

Thanks and enjoy you're flying!!

ian

PS Don't buy both Treeline and Landscapes (if you're thinking of it). Landscapes, with buildings and more trees, completely replaces Treeline and it would be a waste of money. Also, the Landscapes "beta" samples in RI, DE, and HI are nothing like the finished product. That's what happens when it takes more than a year to finish a product!

Ian. thanks for this, because I never knew that you had done a product for England and Wales, something that I was looking at myself.  Can I PM you please?  Cheers K

[iangbusa 2]

Absolutely, Kevin! I'm on FSDeveloper (more often) also so feel free to use either.

ian