5 hours ago, Kaboki said:

About melted PG, i had that problem and turned off PG. But after SU7, PG has worked flawlessly for me. Only sometimes I get melted buildings, I guess its a overloaded server issue..

My PG has always looked like this.

WU7 PG Cities look pretty good to me, maybe I would have liked Sydney to be larger but its a small concern.
USA has the best quality PG IMO.
London unfortunately for me is a melted mess - a great shame as I often fly in/out of UK.

I have my Terrain LOD set to 300 - higher LOD definitely helps.

45 minutes ago, MrBitstFlyer said:

My PG has always looked like this.

Well, this one we all have, PG never looks good that close to the ground, the shapes will be irregular until you get a little higher. It is what it is. What I ment with "melted" was that it never became even remotely close to even your picture even from 1000 feet+, it really couldnt load for whatever reason(before SU7). It was way more melted than your picture, I couldnt even destingish the houses from the ground...It was really bad, only in New York and Miami I was able to get it loading properly...

 

 

How do I post a picture?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

29 minutes ago, Kaboki said:

How do I post a picture?

One way is to upload it to imgur.com  and then choose 'get share links'  and then select the BBCode (choose 'copy')  and then paste that here in a post.

 

It is worth noting that there are two different things being confused in the original post.

1. ground textures based on aerial photography.  You always get these regardless of whether Photogrammetry is on or off, as it is how the base game does ground textures.
2. the three dimensional buildings and other structures - which can be either:

• hand crafted by an artist (for example terminals in a hand crafted airport)
• or are created by photogrammetry based on the real buildings from multiple photos (only shows up in certain cities)
• or use autogen pre-created models from a library chosen to match the roof profile  (the default for smaller towns and cities in game)

 

So you always get the aerial ground texturing but how the buildings are generated varies a lot.

 

Edited February 8, 20224 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

34 minutes ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

ground textures based on aerial photography.  You always get these regardless of whether Photogrammetry is on or off, as it is how the base game does ground textures.

This was actually the gist of my question:  Do people who run with ONLY autogen get the same ground imagery that is found in the photogrammetry regions?  if not, do the autogen buildings look different in those areas to better match the different textures?

Ive seen countless people on these boards ask others what they see in their sim and others usually happily oblige with a pic.

I have to assume none of the responders new HOW to take a pic and then post it.  maybe that was it.

and BTW - the last time I turned off photogrammetry I found it deleted my rolling cache file and it took me a while to build it back up because I have slow internet.  I just thought somebody could post a pic.

Edited February 8, 20224 yr by sightseer

As others have said, it is a setting in the sim. Switch it on and off to your hearts content. See for yourself. Or not...your choice, but don't act incredulous when people don't oblige your ridiculously lazy request.

33 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

As others have said, it is a setting in the sim. Switch it on and off to your hearts content. See for yourself. Or not...your choice, but don't act incredulous when people don't oblige your ridiculously lazy request.

I help a lot of random people on here as much as Iam able and I rarely ask for anything from anyone.  I don't appreciate the name calling.  It has nothing to do with laziness.  I just thought somebody might oblige and post a pic...ITS CALLED BEING NEIGHBORLY!

12 hours ago, sightseer said:

Photogrammetry comes with its own high res aerial imagery and in many cases I think its much more realistically colored than other areas.  Sometimes it seems too brown but I get the feeling that if all the area was that same color set, it might be right.  Many PG areas, like in the pic below, look great to me.

But it got me to wondering if people who do not run with photogrammetry on get the benefit of these higher res aerial images.  You can clearly see the border on the right of this pic.  The PG area has much better ground and building colors.  The autogen area is pale and just not right.

This is just a bit north of ShellHarbour Australia.  If you DO NOT use PG, please post a pic of this area.

 

Here is a screenshot of the same area WITHOUT photogrammetry. To my eyes it looks very similar to the one you posted.

I don't doubt that once the bugs are eliminated, photogrammetry-based scenery will be accepted as superior to anything that can be done with autogen. In the meantime, I think MSFS autogen is pretty darn good and I am happy with it. It certainly beats melted buildings!  Regarding a different post in this thread, I see NO tall buildings in the area of YPPF.

Edited February 8, 20224 yr by cobalt

OK just to clear a few more things up.

The photography used is not "satellite" it is aerial photography from specialised mapping aircraft that fly mapping runs in a grid pattern. The mapping photos are flown lower at much higher resolution over the middle of cities, from a higher altitude over the suburbs and very high altitude in more remote areas.

Photogrammetry is only possible with the low altitude runs as you need several passes over a building to get a 3D recreation.

Hence the boundary of what is possible for photogrammetry is often also the boundary of the hi-res low altitude photography.  Hence the same point that photogrammetry stops will often also show a drop in ground terrain resolution.

Turning photogrammetry off should only effect 3D buildings and structures like docks and bridges. It should not change the ground textures.

This thread gives me a migraine 

Is it only me? I deactiveted PG because of the stuttering and bad frames after SU7. Special at landing in PG Area with some handmade Airport I came not over 10 FPS.

Without PG there is over 30 FPS at the same Airport.

I also notice that the PG areas are much darker than surrounding areas. PG areas can be seen from miles away, It's very noticeable and detracts from immersion IMO.

I tend to think that the colours in the sim are a bit off generally. Calibrating my monitor helped slightly but didn't eliminate the issue. 

Edited February 8, 20224 yr by GaryK
clarity

9 hours ago, cobalt said:

I think MSFS autogen is pretty darn good and I am happy with it.

Thank you very much for the pic.  To me there is a less jarring transition in the textures over to the right for some reason.  maybe settings or hardware?  And the thing I was most curious to see was what color roofs the buildings and houses would have.  I often find the autogen to be too pale but those houses seem darker and they fit in well.  I wonder if BlackShark AI plays any role in creating the autogen?  I don't think it does but I don't know.

Thanks again for being willing to participate in the thread.