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.

It looked like you were doing it right. What makes you seek another tutorial? Nothing has changed since FSX came out. I was part of the beta team, and was succeeding with resample.exe right from the gate.
The way to succeed at design is to follow logical paths. You have been guided toward one, are you following it? Starting over just means you'll have to follow that error message some later time. Why not now?
Whatever did you find out about the bmp?

Ok let me try it.I posted an inf file for Blake Island above in the thread. Why not use it and carefully substitute your image files, and paths. Then see what happens! That will tell us if some obscure syntax error was present in the inf file like you suggest above. I don't expect this to be the case, but you seem to think so, so this is one logical way to test your idea.


From Gimp are you using "Export" rather than "Save" or "Save as"? I'm completely Gimp illiterate but it seems to me I read somewhere that you have to use Export, that may have something to do with the "corrupt .bmp header".
If you just go as far as "add map from background" and then compile that as shown in step 21 of the tutorial does it compile OK?
The tutorial is OK BTW up until you get to the shorelines/Sbuilder part of it. There you should not disable default .bgls but exclude and rebuild instead. Cross that bridge when you get to it though, get your photoreal to compile for now.

What do you use, J?
It does compile but at the same time, chunks of the island disappear from a distance....![]()


I posted an inf file for Blake Island above in the thread. Why not use it and carefully substitute your image files, and paths. Then see what happens! That will tell us if some obscure syntax error was present in the inf file like you suggest above. I don't expect this to be the case, but you seem to think so, so this is one logical way to test your idea.
Of course you'll have to provide the inf with your georeferencing data as I used geotiffs.
