Sign in to follow this  
Guest julesta

How to put together Photo and MESH without problems

Recommended Posts

Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Although I'm not working on the MESH side of things (yet), I don't think you need to have same LODs for both. It's like having the photo scenery on a low-resolution and high resolution terrain - it doesn't matter at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Julio.If matching mesh to textures was easy, Microsoft would have already done it!The first problem lies with the source.All of our data for mesh and photoreal stems from satellite or aerial imagery. Those images, whether visual or derived from radar, will be inaccurate because of angle, distance, and perspective. The best data is exactly top-down, and that is rare. Some sources use complicated mathematical methods to reduce distortion, but it still exists. The very best data would be derived from the data of skilled surveyors, and some of the meshes of Great Britain reflect that, as the creators are using some of the great mapped data available for that area.The best satellite images and height data will be derived from the same source, and processed by the same methods... very rare right now, and the US government is not releasing the latest sources for us ( and probably won't in the near future ).So just as MS has problems matching river courses to the mesh, so we also have similar problems matching out visual textures to the mesh.Is the mesh off? Yes!Is the photo off? Yes!Is the sim somehow not same as the earth? Yes!So the end result is more art than science. You'll need to make compromises concerning the mesh, photo, and the sim itself.The classic case concerns the height of runways in FS2002. Consider that height written in stone. If you don't like the valley or plateau your mesh now shows around the runways, you should resign yourself to adjust the mesh! Adjusting the runways will mess up the sim!As for photoreal, I'm assuming you are having problems with water and roads. You have what you have with the photos, so the mesh would probably again need adjusting. The bad news is, we've never had a great program to alter mesh height. Burkhard Renk's FSmesh was as close as we got, and I'm not even sure it works with FS2002.I have been experimenting with creating mesh with LWM invisible flatten polygons. This allows re-meshing reworked coasts. It will also allow meshing under roads, and streams, and the heights will be absolute... just like runways. Sloped areas will be a problem as the number of polygons rises rapidly with sloped areas. For now, the BGLC code is difficult, and this is definitely more art than science.FS2000 and CFS2 allowed textured sloped polys using what I recall as SCASM's Area16N E63 polygons. I don't know if these are still allowed, or what their structure would be in BGLC. If we can use these SCASM derived BGLS, we should be able to cover them with photoreal or TDF polygons. That would allow a lot of control over the shape of the mesh, but at a framerate price. That's why Microsoft doesn't use them in FS2002.Dick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Julio,There is no problem in using different LODs eg: LOD 9 for mesh and LOD 5 for photo.You will get exact matching if you know the exact boundaries of your raw data and enter that boundaries on the Source section of your INF files. The resampler takes care of it.Saludos (from Coimbra),Luis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this