Sign in to follow this  
Guest artmartin

Photoreal scenery + FSX = big problem???

Recommended Posts

With the increased ground resolution in FSX, it occured to me that it is going to take far more hard drive space to store photoreal scenery textures at the new resolutions, meaning that areas of photoreal scenery made for FSX will probably have higher detail, but will be made for smaller areas in order to keep file sizes down. I heard somewhere that the new ground textures are 16 times more detailed- I take this to mean that they will be displayed at a resolution of 1.2 meters per pixel (which seems about right by looking at the screenshots), instead of the currect 4.8 (1.2 squared goes into 4.8 squared 16 times). This means that in order to cover the same area at the new, high resolution, the file size will have to be 16 times larger. If Megascenery Pacific Northwest (which currently takes up 13GB of my hard drive) were to be released at the full resolution capable by FSX, it would take up... 208GB!!!! (13gb x 16 = 208). If I have all this right, which of course I'm not certain of, there could be a pretty big change in the way photoreal scenery is done for FS.Which leads me to my question: will ground textures at lower (read current 4.8 meters per pixel) resolutions be able to be displayed in FSX, allowing us to keep our current photoreal sceneries?-Scott Armstrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

>Which leads me to my question: will ground textures at lower>(read current 4.8 meters per pixel) resolutions be able to be>displayed in FSX, allowing us to keep our current photoreal>sceneries?My guess is that the answer is going to be: YES.By the way, I always felt that photoreal sceneries will be less and less viable with increased reolution. Not only the size of the scenery on the disk but just delivering such scenery to the market may be very hard to do in terms of human effort.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring on them higher resolution textures ..i'm sick of blurry ground, i wanna see some propper soil for a change ;-)I'll go buy a larger HDD if that's what it takes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I'm all for high rez ground, don't get me wrong! :-jumpy I'm just curious about how the tradeoff is going to work out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hey, I'm all for high rez ground, don't get me wrong! :-jumpy> I'm just curious about how the tradeoff is going to work>out...It's gonna work out just fine mate ! Don't worry about it... maybe FSX will ship with a massive 320GB HDD - NOT !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>If Megascenery Pacific Northwest>(which currently takes up 13GB of my hard drive) were to be>released at the full resolution capable by FSX, it would take>up... 208GB!!!!>-Scott Armstrong208GB! Yup and I remember when 40 *MB* was a stretch! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> " X-Plane v8 + Global-Scenery is out !No way jose :-erks Don't even consider buying that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>With the increased ground resolution in FSX, it occured to me>that it is going to take far more hard drive space to store>photoreal scenery textures at the new resolutions, meaning>that areas of photoreal scenery made for FSX will probably>have higher detail, but will be made for smaller areas in>order to keep file sizes down. I heard somewhere that the new>ground textures are 16 times more detailed- I take this to>mean that they will be displayed at a resolution of 1.2 meters>per pixel (which seems about right by looking at the>screenshots), instead of the currect 4.8 (1.2 squared goes>into 4.8 squared 16 times). This means that in order to cover>the same area at the new, high resolution, the file size will>have to be 16 times larger. If Megascenery Pacific Northwest>(which currently takes up 13GB of my hard drive) were to be>released at the full resolution capable by FSX, it would take>up... 208GB!!!! (13gb x 16 = 208). If I have all this>right, which of course I'm not certain of, there could be a>pretty big change in the way photoreal scenery is done for>FS.>>Which leads me to my question: will ground textures at lower>(read current 4.8 meters per pixel) resolutions be able to be>displayed in FSX, allowing us to keep our current photoreal>sceneries?>>-Scott ArmstrongUnless somehing drastically changes from now until ship (which can happen), yes older style photosceneries should work. Cheers,Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A year from now, the average hard drive will probably be over a TB anyway so not worried about hard drive space. I'm not expert, but I would think the limitation we are going to reach with something like MegaScenery at 1.2 m/p would be related more to video memory and how fast data can be moved from hard drive to video card. If my math is correct, a visibility of 50 miles would be about 80,000 square miles of textures to display. Not sure how many gigabytes of textures that would equate to at 1.2m/p, but it's a lot.Matt Fox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand I wonder where outfits like Megascenery would come up with color data for 1.2m scenery resolution. The real such data is very expensive and though you can get such resolution in B&W for next to free colorized B&W photography never produced good results. Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>On the other hand I wonder where outfits like Megascenery>would come up with color data for 1.2m scenery resolution. The>real such data is very expensive and though you can get such>resolution in B&W for next to free colorized B&W photography>never produced good results. >>Michael J.>http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpg>http://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpgI believe they already have data at that resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their "Megacity" photoscenery comes from free USGS color aerial photos of US cities, which are originally .3 meters per pixel. Getting good high rez satellite or airphotos for bigger areas will definitely be expensive though, but I'm sure they can work out deals. Their new Southern California V2 terrain comes from high rez images of some kind that they didn't get from the USGS, so maybe they already have the resources to do this.-Scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A point to remember is that digital aerial photographs have a significant commercial value. In the UK 1m resolution photographs cost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if I recall, I had heard through the grapevine over at Megascenery's support Forums that PC Aviator and Megascenery (which are pretty much the same company) had struck some sort of a deal with Airphoto USA for most of the aerial imagery used in their MegaCITY packages as well as the MegaCITY portion of Megascenery Pacific Northwest.If there's free stuff floating around, I'd gladly take some. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Bring on them higher resolution textures ..i'm sick of blurry>ground, i wanna see some propper soil for a change ;-)>>I'll go buy a larger HDD if that's what it takes...Right on!! So will I. It would be so nice to see some real scenery for a change.:( Regards,Mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>" X-Plane v8 + Global-Scenery is out !> It is shipped in 7 DVDs double layer. > The disk requirement to install the entire planet is 60>Gig.">>http://www.global-scenery.org/I think one of the developers quoted in this forum that in terms of size of the FSX program, shipping it on two DVD's would be pushing it. It sounds to me like we cannot really count on having high resolution for the whole planet. :( It sure would be nice though! :-jumpy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>" X-Plane v8 + Global-Scenery is out !> It is shipped in 7 DVDs double layer. > The disk requirement to install the entire planet is 60>Gig."I think most of it is because of mesh. Looking at the actual texture itself I don't think anything on this X-Plane site is "worth" 60 GB of my HD. The mesh indeed seems to be extremely detailed but the rest of the detail is somehwhat disappointing. Mesh is the easy part - anybody can do it since it is only bits of data, give me 60GB worth of landclass information and that would have profound effect on how things look.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally, ultra-high resolution photo scenery is a waste out in rural areas. My guess is what we'll see from developers is going to be much the same over the large areas with small interesting areas going to the 1.2 m stuff. Size is going to always be limiting as well as speed of disk acccess.Art

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this