Always on. Because I don't make believe graphics. I also don't like CGI in movies.

Turn PG off and look at my own house. I would never recognize it. Turn PG on and yes, that's my house! And that's the houses of all my friends and extended family.

It's a fledgling technology, one that's pretty amazing even with it's flaws.  To me complaining about photogrammetry in MSFS is like the guy complaining about his satellite internet connection on a 777 in the middle of the Atlantic.  

Some cities look better than others.  I understand there are different vendors, including City and State Governments, Universities, Private Companies etc. just like the prototiles themselves they don't all look the same.    I personally have no issues with the photogrammetry.  Blackshark is amazing but has trouble placing skyscrapers and making them look right.

3 hours ago, aniiran said:

It's a fledgling technology, one that's pretty amazing even with it's flaws.  To me complaining about photogrammetry in MSFS is like the guy complaining about his satellite internet connection on a 777 in the middle of the Atlantic.  

Some cities look better than others.  I understand there are different vendors, including City and State Governments, Universities, Private Companies etc. just like the prototiles themselves they don't all look the same.    I personally have no issues with the photogrammetry.  Blackshark is amazing but has trouble placing skyscrapers and making them look right.

Another reason for Photogrammetry: castles and cathedrals don't look like tall apartment buildings.

For me with ACCU Sim Seasons set to 75% tree height and PG disabled the trees look right but the buildings. do not. With PG on the buildings are a lot better but the trees are too tall. I go with PG on and altitude to make it look better.

I keep it on now too, since there isn't much of a perf hit anymore. There's something about how it blends in with the surrounding terrain that looks good, realistic. Not blending in as in melting lol. The autogen looks a bit...off. Maybe the way the light hits those buildings, i dunno. but PG looks good to me.

I like photogrammetry, and I also want it to be of better quality in the future update.

I’ve tried with it both on and off but decided to leave it on. The places with poor photogrammetry looks, well poor. But then there are so many places with decent PG that really increases immersion and the feeling of “being there”. Florence and Venice comes to mind, but there are many, many others. Like Seville:

The colors are a bit wonky. Was experimenting with NVIDIA Freestyle filters.

By the way, this site shows all the PG cities in MSFS. As well as all enhanced airports and points of interest.

Be careful everyone about complaining too much - don't think it would be a forward move if Asobo took PG away or stopped doing updates.  As people have said, easy to turn it off globally or un-install updates if don't like it.  

For cities I'm familiar with, the extra detail is worth it to me albeit with strange trees etc at times.

On 5/22/2022 at 9:24 PM, Todd2 said:

I was not pleased with the photogrammetry from Naples or the previous from London.  First time I've ever turned photogrammetry off do you guys have it on or off. Naples had objects floating in the air which is of course not normal.

I have mine off - always !

And it takes to on to mutch resources IMO.

cheers 😉

Oooo, sometimes I've got PG on.. and off.. and on.. and off..and... Sometimes it's beautiful, sometimes it's ugly. Sometimes he eats up Framerates, sometimes barely. Sometimes you are right, sometimes someone else. Sometimes you recognize the arguments of others, sometimes you disagree. Sometimes we think we are unique, sometimes we are predictable. Ah, sometimes ... ?? 😉

No question that photogrammetry is great for those that are able to use it. But for some of us, it's not an option because when it is turned on we have unacceptably bad performance at or near ground level, even in non-photogrammetry areas. This is a problem that Asobo is (we hope) working on. It has nothing to do with settings, that has been clear for a long time. I look forward to the day when this is fixed.

Alienware Aurora R11, 32 GB ram, Intel i7-10700F, GeForce RTX 2080 Super, Ultra graphics settings

Okay, hold on a sec. If you turn PG off do you have no buildings? or does it use generic ones in its place? 

6 minutes ago, Lotharen said:

Okay, hold on a sec. If you turn PG off do you have no buildings? or does it use generic ones in its place? 

With PG off you still get the generic/autogen buildings, yes. 

43 minutes ago, Cpt_Piett said:

With PG off you still get the generic/autogen buildings, yes. 

Just to clarify -- these are autogen buildings with the correct footprint, height, and location corresponding to the real world structures -- very different from the generic autogen of earlier sims. The result is that with photogrammetry turned off, while you do not get the exact RW appearance of cities, etc., you do get something reasonably close.

Also, there are now a number of freeware photogrammetry-based city sceneries (files placed in the Community folder) that work with PG in the sim turned off. This is a bonus for those of us that cannot use streamed PG because of the ground-level performance problem I mentioned above.

Edited May 24, 20224 yr by cobalt

Hi,

I would like it to be possible for the user to disable the photogrammetry of certain cities (vegetation included). Thus, for example, Valencia or Seville are good in PG, but other cities and areas are a real disaster.
Greetings