Photoscenery or Landclass/Vector Scenery Preference?

[Guest davewins]

>I am a strong advocate for photo. Not only does it make the>experience more real imho-but it only going to get better in>the next couple of years. As far as autogen-the way google>earth is going-I would expect most cities to be at least to>be populated not only with buildings, but with correct>architectual buildings in their precise place-one can already>see that right now. Runways that can slope, look natural, and>not artificially neon...>>3 shots of sedona with the technolgy now-1) real I took 2)>google flight sim 3)fsx with full autogen-which one portrays>reality better-today? How will this technology be 2 years>from now?>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg>Forum Moderator>http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/>>http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179167.jpg>>>http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179168.jpg>>>http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/179169.jpg>Hey Geofa, what is that 2nd pic of google earth flight simulation???? I have google earth but no flight simulation feature in do you have another version??

[Geofa 108]

The latest version has it built in. You have to hit a couple buttons to enable it-I can't remember but control a or something like that. Maybe someone else has a better memory than I. :-)http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

[Guest davewins]

I got it to work. That is amazing. Now I am really confused as to what I would want. Photoscenery + autogen, landclass + autogen, etc etc. Is there a way to fly in the flight simulator in a 3d world on this google earth?? I know you can set it for 3d buildings when you just explore around but not sure if you can do it in flight simulator mode.I am impressed but at the same time confused. Confused as to what it would take to make everything you see in 3d format. It's basically like you are flying over a picture of the entire world in google earth fs. It's still awesome. This is more or less what I am experiencing in FSX. Essentially flying over a picture so when viewed with altitude and in more of a top-down view it is very enjoyable but when of course flying at either low altitude or not looking straight down it begins to take on a flat blurry image. I am guessing that this is what autogen is for and this represents the problem that I have in FSX. I am still confused on the meters/pixel and how this relates to 3d objects. Is all scenery whether photoscenery or landclass in 2d format??

[Guest wyoming]

for a transitional mix between photoscenery (reproduction) and generated 3D objects (simulation). I'm thinking, for example, about generation of 3D objects from sets of pics at different angles. There are programs that do that but it's massive work and not realistic as far as world-wide coverage is concerned. Selected airports on the other hand...Another example would be fractal trees. Try to fly over the redwood national park with Tileproxy for example, and you'll see what I mean.Still another example would be a reconception of the mesh: perhaps with triangles instead of squares, some sort of fractal noise, with the idea of getting rid of the rounded, underwater-like edges.Lighting and season are another problem here, although if the above is accomplished, I personally wouldn't mind waiting to get those. Particularly if the clouds get better (which they are even now).A sculptor once said that simplicity is complexity resolved, and I strongly feel that the hobby is in dire need of out-of-the-box thinking rather than insisting on adding layers upon layers of complexity.As far as the general goal, I'm certain that no one here would disagree that the ultimate goal is to have a full, real-time reproduction of reality and not a game-like simulation (e.g. herding dinosaurs with a flying bike.)

[Mace 1,896]

>Just wondering what everyone's preference for scenery would>be in FS in a perfect world (where all the world has high>quality and color balanced imagery for most of the globe)...>Until FS can process light and seasonal differences for photoscenery textures on-the-fly, photoscenery will be nothing more than a false god of FS scenery types.I do not think FS can do this yet. If FS can already do this, wonderful. If it cannot...Once this hurdle is overcome (with hardware advances), photoscenery will be magnificent.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[Ramasurinen 0]

In full agreement with Rhett. If photoscenery can have its shadows removed, be properly colour matched, have a 3d building or tree placed over every single pancaked one in every photo, be lit in realtime with proper shadowmaps, and account for seasons and night lighting with proper transitions... then I'm all for it.If any one of those features is missing? no.For me immersion is all about consistency. I really couldn't care less about the quality of a scene as long as its quality is consistent and looks at least correct from a lighting standpoint. Photoscenery as it stands today is anything but that.I don't doubt that day may come, and if it does great, but with the current standard of photo data for the world, to me Vector/Lanclass is still far superior for immersion.

[sightseer 895]

My problem with photoscenery is that it has all buildings and trees and shadows in 2d and they only look right from altitude.I think a good answer would be really well defined landclass, waterclass and autogen with a lot of different textures. I'm not sure why the current landclass resolution or texture possiblities arent more/better than they are. If its a 'space required on your hard drive' thing, then perhaps the people with servers large enough to hold photoscenery of the entire world could also set up worldwide landclass, waterclass and autogen files and then stream that information down to the users system.

[Guest jshyluk]

In an IDEAL sim...To answer the first question, the most Canadian answer would obviously be to create a hybrid: a solution that accomodates both views equally (but probably pleases no-one completely).My ideal sim would rely less on textured landscape and more on autogen. Although not really autogen, but more like "realgen". Autogen is a process that adds generic objects to specific tiles. A realgen would place the correct building in its correct location. Also, trees, fences, lamp-posts, icebergs, highway signs, cacti, hedgerows, the whole whack. The reason we use textures in the first place is to model millions of mundane objects cheaply. But if all those objects are rendered, the value of the scenery texture is reduced.Of course, plotting every single real-world item would be rediculously complicated for Microsoft, and the sim would cost seven figures for the consumer. What might help is if the sim came with an easy way for the end user to upload their own custom realgen into the sim, plus a Second Life-like way of networking the uploads into a community-created virtual world. Wow, if this isn't my most heedlessly optimistic post ever, I don't know what is, but there you go. If money and computer resources were not a limiting factor for any flight simmer, this is what I would like to see. Jeff ShylukSenior Staff Reviewer, Avsim

[Guest wyoming]

But, hey, I have a thing for false gods.

[jbroadwa 0]

I'm definitely on the photoscenery bandwagon. I also think that this technology is a lot closer to reality than most people think.1) Seasonal variations can be modeled by a simple piecewise linear model using covariance equalization. There are minor second order effects, but the fact is most seasonal transitions can be modeled as a simple multiply and add of constants which can be done in real-time. 2) Shadows present a true problem. You have to estimate the skyshine component and full sun components and somehow separate the two. Shadows occur when the sunlight is blocked, but skyshine still occurs (otherwise everything in shadow would be black). There are some algorithms on the horizon to solve this, but it is open research as far as I can tell. Multiple images though could be used to remove shadows without separating sunlight/skylight conditions.3) New pattern recognition algorithms have radically improved identification of roads, buildings, fences, etc. from aerial imagery. It is not perfect, but eerily close. As long as shadows have been removed, these algorithms could do wonders placing autogen (or realgen as I've seen in this thread) automatically on photoscenery textures. 4) Hard drive space is cheap and is getting cheaper. You can always download your flight plan (or even large areas like Western US). 5) I think you would still need autogen and seasonal information to tell the algorithms when to apply certain seasonal transforms and what color the autogen trees or types of trees should be.So, I think photoscenery coverage is a reality within the next five years given systems like the new Microsoft Virtual Earth (anyone looked at their house from four different view points yet -- it's pretty cool). Now, whether or not there is a business case for it, that's beyond my knowledge. I do know the technology is getting very close to making this a reality and would love to see it in the sim. My two cents, Joshua

[Geofa 108]

Read the 5th bullet: :-)http://vector1media.com/spatialsustain/?p=34 http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpgForum Moderatorhttp://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

[Mace 1,896]

>Read the 5th bullet: :-)Yep, that would be huge. But I think we're still several years away from seeing that type of thing in our sim on a practical (read=fps) level. Not so much because of the software, but more likely because of hardware.Furthermore, there's a vast gulf difference between putting FS technology into MS Virtual Earth, vs. putting MS Virtual Earth technology into FS. You can link the two, but it has to be done with respectable performance or else it's of no use to us.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[Mace 1,896]

To be honest, that looks terrible. I'd rather not fly over...that.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[Guest david W.]

>In full agreement with Rhett. If photoscenery can have its>shadows removed, be properly colour matched, have a 3d>building or tree placed over every single pancaked one in>every photo, be lit in realtime with proper shadowmaps, and>account for seasons and night lighting with proper>transitions... then I'm all for it.>Shadows are an essential part of any good photoscenery. They should never be removed. They provide depth to the landscape/scenery one is viewing. Where there are shadows, the scenery stands out all the better. The photos below all show how important shadows are in giving depth to the trees/scene. Remove the shadows and you destroy the visuals. After all, these shadows are the shadows as seen by the aircraft that captured the images. (Southern California)>>For me immersion is all about consistency. I really couldn't>care less about the quality of a scene as long as its quality>is consistent and looks at least correct from a lighting>standpoint. Photoscenery as it stands today is anything but>that.>I

[Mace 1,896]

>>That day has already come. Give one/both of the above two>titles a try and see for yourself. Can you fly over the scenery of either of those titles during any season and at any time of the day, accurately?In other words, will I fly over snow there, in Wales, on a cold January morning? Or will the ground texture look like mid-July?These are the limitations of photoscenery that must be overcome before it is ready for prime-time.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2585 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2gb Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8 (1T), WD 150 gig 10000rpm Raptor, WD 250gig 7200rpm SATA2, Seagate 120gb 5400 rpm external HD, CoolerMaster Praetorian