Jump to content

nickhod

Preview Of Non-Photogrammetry City Center?

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know if there's been a preview, either screenshot or video, of flying over a non-photogrammetry city center?

We all know photogrammetry covered cities are going to look great.
Non-photogrammetry residential areas look good as machine learning is picking up roof colour, roof style, house style and footprint and creating some highly plausible autogen.

I don't recall seeing any previews of a a non-photogrammetry city center though. I'm interested to know how they look.

There's surely a limit to what ML autogen can do for the highly bespoke buildings you see in a city center.
There's also a limit to how many hand modelled POIs they can add.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a city and airport featured in that huge storm over the ocean screenshot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ryanbatcund said:

Wasn't there a city and airport featured in that huge storm over the ocean screenshot?

I think that was Nassau, and true,  I dont think that was photogrametry . But it was pretty much at a distance too

Edited by Casualcas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nickhod said:

Does anyone know if there's been a preview, either screenshot or video, of flying over a non-photogrammetry city center?

We all know photogrammetry covered cities are going to look great.
Non-photogrammetry residential areas look good as machine learning is picking up roof colour, roof style, house style and footprint and creating some highly plausible autogen.

I don't recall seeing any previews of a a non-photogrammetry city center though. I'm interested to know how they look.

There's surely a limit to what ML autogen can do for the highly bespoke buildings you see in a city center.
There's also a limit to how many hand modelled POIs they can add.

This is how Paris looks:
 

err8Zzk.jpg


You can also look on the video they sent to the content creators, FSElite channel on youtube published the full video, some cities shown there aren't covered by photogrammetry like: São Paulo - Brazil, London and Lisbon - Portugal.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ca_metal said:

This is how Paris looks:

Looks about equivalent in details to Orbx Netherlands for Aerofly FS 2 (but the building textures seem quite low-res) Blowing up the image also shows several areas with no buildings.

A tentative conclusion is that Orbx and others could probably compete well in high quality city and airport creation for this sim....

Especially as they would not be paying for orthos, which is a lot of the cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, HiFlyer said:

Looks about equivalent in details to Orbx Netherlands for Aerofly FS 2 (but the building textures seem quite low-res) Blowing up the image also shows several areas with no buildings.

A tentative conclusion is that Orbx and others could probably compete well in high quality city and airport creation for this sim....

Especially as they would not be paying for orthos, which is a lot of the cost.

I totally agree, coincidently I was just thinking the same thing! Equivalent in detail to Orbx, but with all of my Orbx products, plus FSDT, Fly Tampa...etc. Weather addons, and so on, I'd say equivalent or less in some areas.

Mike.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about restricted areas that are not displayed in google maps and bing like Military bases etc....

 

Will there be black voids in restricted areas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Kilo60 said:

What about restricted areas that are not displayed in google maps and bing like Military bases etc....

 

Will there be black voids in restricted areas?

somebody from ign asked the devs about that.

“In general, whenever an area is blurred in Bing, or is otherwise restricted, we will use procedural techniques to fill in the blanks. Those areas won’t be fully authentic, but we will have something that generally fits into the area.”

article here: https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/10/08/how-will-microsoft-flight-simulator-deal-with-what-governments-dont-want-you-to-see

 

cheers,

-andy crosby

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

London:

On the left you can see parts of central London. There are some hand modelled buildings such as Tower Bridge, Tower of London and the O2, the rest is autogen. In the City there are some generic high-rise buildings instead of iconic buildings such as the Gherkin, in Canary Wharf there are no skyscrapers at all. All in all I think the autogen looks okay from that altitude, although those bright tower blocks seem to be a bit too dominant and not very typical for London. Also, there seems to be an issue with autogen draw distance (although that could be due to the poor quality of the image). To make it look more realistic they should at least add the skyscraper clusters in the City and Canary Wharf, otherwise approaching ‎EGLC will only be half the fun. I’m sure they will.

YwqJ5cM.jpg

Lisbon:The city centre is obscured by the clouds but we still get a thorough impression. Here the autogen seems to fit much better than in the London footage. This looks fantastic, almost as if it was photogrammetry. The higher altitude might also add to this impression.

TiJq6YJ.jpg

I think non-photogrammetry scenery looks awesome, especially in rural areas. The challenge will be adapting the various architectural styles, especially in such diverse regions as Europe, in city centres in particular.

This could be something for 3rd party devs. The only problem I see is that Bing regularly update their imagery and 3d data. Imagine some 3rd party company invests a lot of time and money in modelling a city and then 2 weeks after the release Bing come up with a photogrammetry version😅. Quite risky.   

All in all I think non-photogrammetry cities generally look great compared to what we’re used to, especially for a default scenery, still they come nowhere near photogrammetric cities. Let’s hope Bing pushes on with updating their data.

Edited by Shack95
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the screenshots. 👍

No doubt lots of hand placed scenery in Paris and London (and they look good because of it).

Lisbon is probably more representative of an average city, and it still looks good, so well done to Asobo 😀

I agree that scenery developers will have to look at far flung places that wont realistically have photogrammetry any time soon.
The photogrammetry coverage of Google is pretty formidable now and I would expect that, given time, MS will throw money at catching up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pilots here may know, what is the minimum altitude  an aircraft is authorized to fly over a city ? Several thousands feet I would guess.  I mean we need convincing views at some altitude not total realism at ground level, except in the last mile of an approach maybe l. This is not a walking simulator, a driving simulator  but a flight simulator after all !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, domkle said:

Pilots here may know, what is the minimum altitude  an aircraft is authorized to fly over a city ? Several thousands feet I would guess.  I mean we need convincing views at some altitude not total realism at ground level, except in the last mile of an approach maybe l. This is not a walking simulator, a driving simulator  but a flight simulator after all !

Agreed, but on some approaches you fly relatively low over a city. On the EGLC Rwy 9 approach for instance you can clearly see many of London's landmarks and on final you pass the Canary Wharf skyline cluster rather closely. Without these landmars this particular approach wouldn't be that much fun. I'm sure there are similar other examples. But as I said, I'm sure they'll polish the scenery up over the coming months, especially in popular cities such as London and Paris.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shack95 said:

 

Totally agree. Some details are a must on the lines of approach. Now, I lived for some years in the heart of Paris (7th district), do I need to see the lovely facade of my building ?  

There is of course an exception (every rule has one !), If I take off with an emergency heli from  downtown Paris. But do we need the whole shebang from this particular case ? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, domkle said:

Pilots here may know, what is the minimum altitude  an aircraft is authorized to fly over a city ? Several thousands feet I would guess.  I mean we need convincing views at some altitude not total realism at ground level, except in the last mile of an approach maybe l. This is not a walking simulator, a driving simulator  but a flight simulator after all !

Unless you are simulating an air-ambulance or police helicopter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Grindathotte said:

Unless you are simulating an air-ambulance or police helicopter.

Coincidentally, I believe Microsoft said no copters will be included for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, domkle said:

Now, I lived for some years in the heart of Paris (7th district), do I need to see the lovely facade of my building ? 

Of course not. Would still be nice if the facades resembled at least vaguely the Parisian Haussmann style architecture and not look like the walls of 20th century industrial warehouse. But I’m sure they’ll do it right.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for the heck of it I Google Earth Paris to see how it would look.  I've used Google Earth Pro sometime ago and it looked ok but now I don't know how they do this much detail and at 700ft. Even the trees are starting to look more like... trees!  This looks very close to a photo.

Maybe in 10+yrs we would be able stream such visuals? 

48869894907_2e122b11d1_o.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder, how Hong Kong will look like in MSFS. And I hope that Fly Tampa will come up with a new version of Kai Tak for this sim 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, TuFun said:

Maybe in 10+yrs we would be able stream such visuals? 

 

By then I expect to see things in their real life state: imagine this cathedral to look a bit burned and without that right tower if you flew over it in your sim today!

Edited by Flamingpie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TuFun said:

Just for the heck of it I Google Earth Paris to see how it would look.  I've used Google Earth Pro sometime ago and it looked ok but now I don't know how they do this much detail and at 700ft. Even the trees are starting to look more like... trees!  This looks very close to a photo.

Maybe in 10+yrs we would be able stream such visuals? 

 

In a year or so we will be able to stream it, but not Paris (yet) as it's not available on the Bing maps, but it probably will at some point and the dev team already pointed out that updates on Bing would directly update the sim scenery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, domkle said:

Pilots here may know, what is the minimum altitude  an aircraft is authorized to fly over a city ? Several thousands feet I would guess.  I mean we need convincing views at some altitude not total realism at ground level, except in the last mile of an approach maybe l. This is not a walking simulator, a driving simulator  but a flight simulator after all !

1000 ft AGL over densely populated areas, 500 ft otherwise (with the obvious exception when it is required for landing or taking off).

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, nickhod said:

Does anyone know if there's been a preview, either screenshot or video, of flying over a non-photogrammetry city center?

We all know photogrammetry covered cities are going to look great.
Non-photogrammetry residential areas look good as machine learning is picking up roof colour, roof style, house style and footprint and creating some highly plausible autogen.

I don't recall seeing any previews of a a non-photogrammetry city center though. I'm interested to know how they look.

There's surely a limit to what ML autogen can do for the highly bespoke buildings you see in a city center.
There's also a limit to how many hand modelled POIs they can add.

We've seen a some pictures and video from areas not covered in photogrammetry. There were at least two in the release trailer (Dubai and the Bahamas).

I suspect they'll be some limitations here and it won't be perfect. We should get a good look tomorrow because the preview we are getting has been said to show all the differences, including what the non-streamed scenery will look like (some content creators said they showed a 3 picture side by side by side comparison).

Edited by bonchie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TuFun said:

Just for the heck of it I Google Earth Paris to see how it would look.  I've used Google Earth Pro sometime ago and it looked ok but now I don't know how they do this much detail and at 700ft. Even the trees are starting to look more like... trees!  This looks very close to a photo.

Maybe in 10+yrs we would be able stream such visuals? 

48869894907_2e122b11d1_o.jpg

 

 

This Technique is called photogrammetry, say said in the interview some citys have 3cm per pixel resolution. I do Photogrammetry myself, scanning stuff (Landscape ect.) to watch them in VR, it looks incredible, lifelike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shack95 said:

Agreed, but on some approaches you fly relatively low over a city. On the EGLC Rwy 9 approach for instance you can clearly see many of London's landmarks and on final you pass the Canary Wharf skyline cluster rather closely. Without these landmars this particular approach wouldn't be that much fun. I'm sure there are similar other examples. But as I said, I'm sure they'll polish the scenery up over the coming months, especially in popular cities such as London and Paris.

They should make an in-game feature just like Google Maps has, where you can report something that is wrong. This will allow us to pick a building and specify how tall it should actually be (great for reporting things that are too tall and thus blocking an approach). It could also be used to report clouds in satellite photos, falsely recognized trees (sand dunes), missing trees and buildings, etc. Azure AI should be able to adapt based on the user feedback it gets, so that it can get better at removing clouds and recognizing trees and buildings. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bashope said:

1000 ft AGL over densely populated areas, 500 ft otherwise (with the obvious exception when it is required for landing or taking off).

And sometime, the quality of Bing will be under pressure. I can't wait to visit Los Angeles area. Even starting at 4'500 ft on the VFR Corridor (Special Flight Rules), the landing at Santa Monica with the Sunset on LA will be awesome... or not : https://youtu.be/1pJMHCZOpok?t=343 

And Manhattan at 1'500 ft VFR, will be fun : https://youtu.be/uCNhIftv2rc?t=52

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...