While checking things out after the hotfix, in the Spitfire over London, I paused at one point and went sightseeing. I do have the Orbx London Landmarks package in use here but I believe the London Eye is a native POI in the UK upgrade. And rather fine it is.

Been a very long time since I lived or worked in Lunnun, lots of it I simply don't recognise now. As with most folk dealing with the passing of time I feel sad about how some of it has changed (I go visit occasionally via Google Earth) but it ain't all bad. Some of it really did need knocking down. Either way, wild horses couldn't drag me back there now, even for a day-trip.

Edited to add - the boats are sort of a nice touch, but most of them would have to have been air-lifted in to where they are - they'd never get under the bridges!

Edited March 28, 20215 yr by andy1252
add text

Great London shots.  Orbx never made a landmarks set for TE South so we're dependent on the XP London landmarks.  That bridge just downriver from the Eye isn't on it - among other things.

Marvellous images, Andy,....such intricate details...!

Stunning!!

 

Well, that does look better than the London I saw in an early video......but there still appear to be sunken boats and docks, and a rather nasty elevation issue that looks like a weir

23 minutes ago, Christopher Low said:

Well, that does look better than the London I saw in an early video......but there still appear to be sunken boats and docks, and a rather nasty elevation issue that looks like a weir

Yeah, most of the bridges don't match up to their approaching roads and you do still get those photographic but un-modelled boats. Oh, and this is with photogrammetry off (which you probably figured) - I can't stand the UK PG - it's awful. But overall, I think it's pretty good now.

I had assumed that it was with photogrammetry on, so that makes it even more impressive. I am guessing that most non PG areas do not look anywhere near as good as that, otherwise I would question why PG is required at all!

3 hours ago, Christopher Low said:

I had assumed that it was with photogrammetry on, so that makes it even more impressive. I am guessing that most non PG areas do not look anywhere near as good as that, otherwise I would question why PG is required at all!

If you were this close up with photogrammetry on it would look truly awful. Even with good PG, like in Venice, it gets ugly this close, but the PG for the UK is truly disgusting quality. Maybe one day PG will be ok for close work, but for me, it's a no-no anywhere below about 2000 ft. Can be pretty impressive above that, but I mostly like to be lower than that. I am a stranger, or at best a very rare visitor, to a 747 cockpit or similar.

Pretty much all the UK, and in fact most places I've seen, are actually very nicely modelled without PG. Better than Orbx TrueEarth levels, in my own opinion.