• Which the release of FS2020 we see an explosition of activity on the forun and of course we are very happy to see this. But having all questions about FS2020 in one forum becomes a bit messy. So therefore we would like to ask you all to use the following guidelines when posting your questions:

    • Tag FS2020 specific questions with the MSFS2020 tag.
    • Questions about making 3D assets can be posted in the 3D asset design forum. Either post them in the subforum of the modelling tool you use or in the general forum if they are general.
    • Questions about aircraft design can be posted in the Aircraft design forum
    • Questions about airport design can be posted in the FS2020 airport design forum. Once airport development tools have been updated for FS2020 you can post tool speciifc questions in the subforums of those tools as well of course.
    • Questions about terrain design can be posted in the FS2020 terrain design forum.
    • Questions about SimConnect can be posted in the SimConnect forum.

    Any other question that is not specific to an aspect of development or tool can be posted in the General chat forum.

    By following these guidelines we make sure that the forums remain easy to read for everybody and also that the right people can find your post to answer it.

MSFS20 Ground Poly

peacefarm

peacefarm

Messages
203
Country
unitedstates
Hello, I hope I'm posting this in the correct forum, but figured I'd ask since MCX has the ground poly wizard.

I've noticed FlyTampa and certain other developers have managed to create a single projected mesh layer (object) consisting of many individual texture tiles (squares) somehow stitched together in a grid format (A1, A2, B1, B2, etc.)

While CGLs would work for importing aerial imagery, it's not suitable for doing what I'm trying to do which is have full blending control in relation to other Project Mesh layers. So, inevitably they must be objects.

Is anyone familiar with this workflow or has any idea of perhaps how this could be accomplished?

Many thanks in advance.
 
So the texture of the ProjectedMesh (PMs) of fly Tampa is like this, correct?

IMG_20231025_100021.jpg


They create an object in the 3d software,
Made of several meshes(simple planes ), each one with its UV coordinate pointing to the stand identifiers (A, B, C...)
They export that object as a single glTF and compile, then import in the game as a single PM

Now maybe they want to add a grunge layer over the stands Numbers,
So the create another Object, add several geometry where needed and apply a dirt texture to that, with a very low opacity,
Then export and add in the game as PM with a higher priority than the stand one,
So they can obtain dirty used markings


Is this what you need?
 
mamu said:
So the texture of the ProjectedMesh (PMs) of fly Tampa is like this, correct?

View attachment 90212

They create an object in the 3d software,
Made of several meshes(simple planes ), each one with its UV coordinate pointing to the stand identifiers (A, B, C...)
They export that object as a single glTF and compile, then import in the game as a single PM

Now maybe they want to add a grunge layer over the stands Numbers,
So the create another Object, add several geometry where needed and apply a dirt texture to that, with a very low opacity,
Then export and add in the game as PM with a higher priority than the stand one,
So they can obtain dirty used markings


Is this what you need?
Click to expand...
Thank you so much, Mamu! I will give it a try later today and report back. BTW, I'm a big fan of your tutorials, they're incredibly helpful! :wizard:
 
@mamu I am happy to report that your suggestion was successful at bringing in edited aerial as a PM.

Now, I have to ask: what is the advantage of doing a CGL file for an airports aerial imagery if I can just do it this way? Are there any performance or quality benefits?

Thanks.
 
Actually I don't see any real difference in terms of performance or resolution (the Pm should have a slight better res)

At the moment when placing PMs, the editing of the airport may become a pain (ground disappearing when moving vertex of aprons/polygon). The dev team lately was able to reproduce the issue and will work on a fix
(https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/t/ground-disappearing-when-moving-any-object/6576)

About functionality, haven't checked whether the PM color considered when generating ground colour related feature like trees and grass
 
peacefarm said:
what is the advantage of doing a CGL file for an airports aerial imagery if I can just do it this way
Click to expand...
I personally do not feel the render differences between projected mesh and CGI justifies any reason to interchange the two. They were designed for two distinct purposes and blurring that distinction will likely produce unintended results. Putting aside the fact that any projected mesh must be placed manually, to place one the size of a typical CGI with almost no visual would be impossible to do so accurately, imo. In order to place it you projected mesh "automatically," you'd have to calculate the geographic center of each projected mesh and then use some sort of algorithm to transfer that arbitrary point to a coordinate system. Also, there is the very real likelihood that the two do not project the same direction and shape over large areas. If this anticipated difference is not exposed algorithmically, discrepancies could also arise procedurally.

So in fact, if the choice of either is a matter of being efficient and learning only one of the two techniques, it's probably not a good idea - but might be.
 
=rk= said:
I personally do not feel the render differences between projected mesh and CGI justifies any reason to interchange the two. They were designed for two distinct purposes and blurring that distinction will likely produce unintended results. Putting aside the fact that any projected mesh must be placed manually, to place one the size of a typical CGI with almost no visual would be impossible to do so accurately, imo. In order to place it you projected mesh "automatically," you'd have to calculate the geographic center of each projected mesh and then use some sort of algorithm to transfer that arbitrary point to a coordinate system. Also, there is the very real likelihood that the two do not project the same direction and shape over large areas. If this anticipated difference is not exposed algorithmically, discrepancies could also arise procedurally.

So in fact, if the choice of either is a matter of being efficient and learning only one of the two techniques, it's probably not a good idea - but might be.
Click to expand...
Good and valid points.

I found it particularly interesting that Fly Tampa did their Corfu and Boston scenery with Projected Meshes instead of CGL. The reason they did was because they used the same layer to lower the opacity of the pavement areas to use as a blending/detail/grunge layer.

That is also the reason I wanted to do the same as it kills two birds with one stone.

Yes, I think georeferencing is particularly an issue for very large areas. That said, I personally scale and rotate the projected meshes within Blender based on a highly calibrated reference image so when I import them, its a simple matter of overlaying it on the field as scale and rotation is already set. Will it be absolutely perfect? Probably not. However, to the naked it, it's practically seamless.

Nevertheless, thanks for the input and for sharing your findings in regards to quality.
 
mamu said:
Actually I don't see any real difference in terms of performance or resolution (the Pm should have a slight better res)

At the moment when placing PMs, the editing of the airport may become a pain (ground disappearing when moving vertex of aprons/polygon). The dev team lately was able to reproduce the issue and will work on a fix
(https://devsupport.flightsimulator.com/t/ground-disappearing-when-moving-any-object/6576)

About functionality, haven't checked whether the PM color considered when generating ground colour related feature like trees and grass
Click to expand...

Good to know they are working on this. Thanks again for your help Mamu. 😃
 
peacefarm said:
Good and valid points.

I found it particularly interesting that Fly Tampa did their Corfu and Boston scenery with Projected Meshes instead of CGL. The reason they did was because they used the same layer to lower the opacity of the pavement areas to use as a blending/detail/grunge layer.

That is also the reason I wanted to do the same as it kills two birds with one stone.

Yes, I think georeferencing is particularly an issue for very large areas. That said, I personally scale and rotate the projected meshes within Blender based on a highly calibrated reference image so when I import them, its a simple matter of overlaying it on the field as scale and rotation is already set. Will it be absolutely perfect? Probably not. However, to the naked it, it's practically seamless.

Nevertheless, thanks for the input and for sharing your findings in regards to quality.
Click to expand...
Great. You asked a very direct question and I did not see so clear a reply, although there is a very clear distinction, there should be no confusion as to the application of CGI vs projected mesh for anyone else reading along. I feel I've corrected that omission. You are welcome to reinvent the process of ground rendering following the lead of FlyTampa with Federico's blessing. We encourage that, he is one of the best guides developers could learn from.
 
=rk= said:
Great. You asked a very direct question and I did not see so clear a reply, although there is a very clear distinction, there should be no confusion as to the application of CGI vs projected mesh for anyone else reading along. I feel I've corrected that omission. You are welcome to reinvent the process of ground rendering following the lead of FlyTampa with Federico's blessing. We encourage that, he is one of the best guides developers could learn from.
Click to expand...
That's a bit to much Rick, thanks 💕👍

You are 100% correct about is not ideal using PMs for large areas,
I didn't emphasize that in my reply cause peacefarm was talking about using them for airports, and there is where they should fit in
(In the first implementation PMs where not allowed outside of airports, and the sample images in the SDK docu are really airport related, showing a quite large apron and surroundings made with PM)

We have to remember that we are using sort or PMs since fs2k2/fs2k4, we used to call them "ground polys" (my first post here at fsdeveloper were indeed questions about ground polys and how to tweak their asm to avoid z-fighting)
So they are older than CGL imho
The bad about aerial CGL, at the moment, is that multiple CGL may cause issue, so PMs would avoid that 🙂
(
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but PMs do not "detect" the type of terrain. For example if I go a PM for the whole airport, and I assign the type as asphalt, the green areas will not be detected as grass or plants and they'll be rendered with the default asphalt normal.

I have had to create several PMs and cut the object depending on the material type.
 
V-Pilot said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but PMs do not "detect" the type of terrain. For example if I go a PM for the whole airport, and I assign the type as asphalt, the green areas will not be detected as grass or plants and they'll be rendered with the default asphalt normal.

I have had to create several PMs and cut the object depending on the material type.
Click to expand...
In my experience, a material = a uv sheet. I haven't noticed the sim auto detecting material when PM is set to STANDARD in Blender.

What I notice defines the "detail overlay" is what you select within the properties tab in the sim (concrete, asphalt, grass, etc.).
 
peacefarm said:
In my experience, a material = a uv sheet. I haven't noticed the sim auto detecting material when PM is set to STANDARD in Blender.

What I notice defines the "detail overlay" is what you select within the properties tab in the sim (concrete, asphalt, grass, etc.).
Click to expand...
Correct, that's defined in the properties tab in the SDK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top