photogrammetry? ON or Off?

[Flyfaster_MTN002 412]

Have it turned off. Too many issues and weird terrain.

[FlyingInACessna 656]

Photogrammetry is generally great except for where it borders airports (often weird trees picked up as buildings). Looks way better from about 1000 ft+. Autogen models look better on the ground.

The realism with photogrammetry is incredible though. Real buildings, parks, fields, landscapes, cities etc.

Edited January 6, 2021 by FlyingInACessna

[stefaandk 84]

I personally get better FPS with it ON and I tested it extensively given I am running on a 780 still with everything on low so every frame counts.  I totally expected it to be the opposite but approaching an airport with it on performs way better in my case but that may be related to me not pushing visuals to begin with.

[jcomm 6,005]

Well, on my i5 2500 + gtx 960 4gb, I have it OFF because for sure it does impact on my fps.

Most all settings in graphics are either LOW, some MEDIUM and a few OFF, otherwise I wouldn't be able to run MFS satisfactorily.

Not MFS's fault, I know - there aren't such miracles as making a 2012 machine run a 2020/21 sim 🙂

 

Edited January 6, 2021 by jcomm

[cianpars 1,179]

I suppose that if you are interested in flying, then fly with it off but if you are interested in sightseeing, keep it on.  Having it off also helps with FPS if you have a marginal rig too.  It's not really much help if you are flying IFR.

Personally, I keep it on as if I did not want the visuals, I could have stuck with FSX and the tons of addons I had for it.

[tweekz 2,165]

9 hours ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

In 3D cities they should be replaced by generic autogen buildings with the correct size and roofing but random height and style.  If you get no buildings at all something is wrong.

If there is a height attribute on OSM they also have the correct height. But that is rare and only with skyscapers mostly. If something goes wrong you might even end up with weir anomalies, like that huge tower somewhere in Australia if I remember correctly, where someone has put in the wrong number by a decimal. 🙂

[zorro747 33]

On 12/22/2020 at 9:51 PM, Manny said:

Photogrammetry on

Photogrammetry off +3 FPS more?

 

Can you tell me if the "melted" houses is a "common" thing in photogrammetry?  Because I noticed such buildings in Miami and I thought that something was wrong with the sim or internet server. Wasted a lot of time searching for a solution. But as it seems, such rendering usually happens and has nothing to do with the settings etc? Is that right?

 

Also, could anybody explain me the info in the data settings " data consumption 190 GB"  What does it mean? If it is just numbers of downloaded data from the servers, so is this data remains somewhere? Shouldn't it be deleted or it does automatically?

Edited January 6, 2021 by zorro747

[Manny 1,293]

1 hour ago, zorro747 said:

Can you tell me if the "melted" houses is a "common" thing in photogrammetry?  Because I noticed such buildings in Miami and I thought that something was wrong with the sim or internet server. Wasted a lot of time searching for a solution. But as it seems, such rendering usually happens and has nothing to do with the settings etc? Is that right?

 

Also, could anybody explain me the info in the data settings " data consumption 190 GB"  What does it mean? If it is just numbers of downloaded data from the servers, so is this data remains somewhere? Shouldn't it be deleted or it does automatically?

Yes, Melted buildings are due to Photogrammetry = ON. You can confirm this by visiting the same place after changing the PG = OFF you would then see autogen buildings instead.

However, the issu7e is Photogrammetry with low resolution source. If its high resolution at source, the buildings would not look like its melted. In the above screenshot look at Venice. There are no melted buildings using Photogrammetry. So, Photogrammetry with high resolution source is better than Photogrammetry off. 

[Zimmerbz 168]

2 hours ago, zorro747 said:

Can you tell me if the "melted" houses is a "common" thing in photogrammetry?  Because I noticed such buildings in Miami and I thought that something was wrong with the sim or internet server. Wasted a lot of time searching for a solution. But as it seems, such rendering usually happens and has nothing to do with the settings etc? Is that right?

 

Also, could anybody explain me the info in the data settings " data consumption 190 GB"  What does it mean? If it is just numbers of downloaded data from the servers, so is this data remains somewhere? Shouldn't it be deleted or it does automatically?

I have not found a way to fix this and I think it is out of control.  I have searched everywhere and can't seem to find a resolution.  

 

14 minutes ago, Manny said:

Yes, Melted buildings are due to Photogrammetry = ON. You can confirm this by visiting the same place after changing the PG = OFF you would then see autogen buildings instead.

However, the issu7e is Photogrammetry with low resolution source. If its high resolution at source, the buildings would not look like its melted. In the above screenshot look at Venice. There are no melted buildings using Photogrammetry. So, Photogrammetry with high resolution source is better than Photogrammetry off. 

I am not sure if this is correct.  I have flown in high res cities like Chicago, NY, San Fran and they still look like this unless you are right on top of the buildings. 

[Manny 1,293]

56 minutes ago, Zimmerbz said:

t.  I have flown in high res cities like Chicago, NY, San Fran and they still look like this unless you are right on top of the buildings. 

When I say high resolution, in this context  I mean high resolution of the Photogrammetry data they have.   That's the only difference of explanation as to why Venice looks good (undistorted) in Photogrammetry vs some cities in the US where buildings look warped distorted.. Unless someone who understand photogrammetry can explain why there is such a vast difference between these two areas nd replace the word "resolution" with something else instead for the quality of photogrammetry.  What makes low quality vs high quality photogrammetry data is, more photos used to take for the same area/buildings with less. The more photos you have to fuse to make the 3D area/buildings, the better and accurate they are. 

Edited January 6, 2021 by Manny

[Zimmerbz 168]

Here is a question... If I have PG off, but buy a 3rd party scenery such as Drzweicki Chicago, or a Freeware City, will that conflict with the PG being off or will it show the Photorealistic scenery that the payware/freeware has? 

[Wewk584 137]

photogrammetry off or only should effect underlying scenary. Add ons should show through without a difference 

I use photogrammetry off.  It's not as realistic (potentially) as having it on but the melted buildings and spikes coming out of the ground kill my emersion way more. It still is way more closer to real life than my other sim. 

 

And the fps boost is a plus as well although it wasn't my motivation

[EBanalian 19]

I hope photogrammetry gets improved overtime and become more accurate as it looks more realistic but these weird shapes ruin this experience!