• 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.

Sat image requirements

P

Philip Jensen

Messages
49
Country
denmark
hi im looking at purchasing a sat nav for a scenery im developing and i've been 4 different price options to setup the image:

1. is basic processing

2.Processing Level 2 (Systematic Orthorectification)

3.Processing Level 3 (Orthorectification with User-Supplied Ground Control)

and

4.Processing Level 4 (Orthorectification with User-Supplied Ground Control after Initial Supply of the Systematic Orthorectification Product)

the minium or basic process 1 basically assumes this:

1. You will be orthorectifying the data yourself, or
2. The data is from an area of low relief and you do not want the data accurately located.

anyone have any knowledge of this? as well as 0.6m 3-band QuickBird archive imagery or 0.6m 4-band QuickBird archive imagery?

cheers
Philip
 
Hi Phillip.

The Systematic Orthorectification should correct lens distortion, lens angle, and curvature of the earth... I'm not sure what the user-supplied ground control is about.

If the ground is very flat, or you don't care about the smaller distortions, then orthorectification may not be needed for you.

Orthorectification is quite complex... I don't think you would want to "rubber sheet" the images yourself, unless it is quite a small area.

If you're not familiar with Quickbird imagery, and it's format, I wouldn't advise buying it, as you would have no way to know how to manipulate it into the sim. It might not be useable, or may require very expensive software to process.

Dick
 
Hi Phillip.

I think the "ground control" would be specifying the actual target point of the image:

QuickBird_example.PNG


In this image, the large building was not the ground target, so you see the sides of the building, rather than "top down".

To specify the ground target when ordering would likely cost a lot of money, as they would need to schedule the satellite to actually fly over that specific coordinate to get the top down view where you want it... unless they happen to have that image lying around.

Also note you will still need to deal with shadows.

This is a problem with "photoreal" imagery. Even using these Google images as background images can cause problems when using detailed scenery, as there will be placement problems... and they are exaggerated with non-flat terrain, as this picture shows.

A skilled artist with the right tools might be able to correct shadows and building/elevation distortions, but it means some work, regardless of the detailed 0.6m imagery.

Google Earth uses Quickbird imagery ( Digital Globe ) quite a bit. It looks great, until you notice the problems with building placement and shadowing.

I've noticed many placement/shape discepancies between SRTM data, Landsat7 imagery, and these Quickbird images from Google. This might mean photoreal runways that are distorted in shape or placement, as well as building footprints.

I think Google bought the license for the basic processing, and this is the result... and Google is certainly not going to pay artists to remove shadows and correct building distortions and placement.

A mosaic image, made from photos of many ground targets will increase the accuracy of placement and shape. This is what Google Earth is doing, but without correcting to the level of detail you are contemplating. Panning New York City in Google Earth will show loads of buildings sloping at odd angles do to the crudeness of their mosaicing.

NewYork_Mosaic.PNG


The shadowing is actually now made worse for removal, as the angles of the shadows change with each target point, and time of day for the image.

I write this as a caution for buying photo imagery, so you see what you are actually getting.

The goal would be a perfect top-down, orthorectified image, with all building angles adjusted by mosaicing on each building, and runway angles and distances corrected, presented in geographic ( WGS84 lat-long ) projection, with shadows removed.

You aren't going to get this. So you need to decide what is "close enough", and what you are willing to pay for "close enough". And do you have the software tools and skills to satisfy your needs.


Dick
 
Last edited:
Happy to sell you imagery...

Hi Philip,
It sounds like you already have a provider but...
I work for an Alaskan company that processes and sells satellite imagery (Digital Globe, GeoEye, RapidEye, Spot...).

We have several (German) PHD's in satellite image prepossessing that give me great imagery to push at resampler for my project.

I would be happy to hook you up with one of them if you would like to have some imagery processed by professionals used to making flight sim ready imagery.
sruddy at e-terra.com
Sean
 
sruddy said:
Hi Philip,
It sounds like you already have a provider but...
I work for an Alaskan company that processes and sells satellite imagery (Digital Globe, GeoEye, RapidEye, Spot...).

We have several (German) PHD's in satellite image prepossessing that give me great imagery to push at resampler for my project.

I would be happy to hook you up with one of them if you would like to have some imagery processed by professionals used to making flight sim ready imagery.
sruddy at e-terra.com
Sean
Click to expand...

Hey Sean that sounds excellent, im of course worried about price as I don't want to spend to much and keep the project freeware, basically the best scenerio is to have sateltie ready imagery that i can pop into gmax and start making the ground textures and layers.
I'd love to hear more on how we can take this further.

Best regards
Philip
 
I asked one of our imagery people and the minimum order is around $1000 USD.
Greater than 25 sq kilometers.

Gmax is not usually the tool for consuming satellite imagery. Normally that would be done with resampeler.

For a freeware project I would look for free imagery.

Send me an email if you are interested.
sruddy at e-terra.com
Thanks
Sean
 
At 0.6m you can use resampler for the data... but the sliders must be set for it in FSX.

If this is for a flat airport polygon, then GMax would probably be the way to go.

Dick
 
Hi Dick,

I usually have my Terrain texture resolution set to .30 as we have some imagery that is 1 foot.

Would you need the global texture resolution set very high to see .60m resolution on a scenery object or would .60m show up with the lower settings?

Sean
 
I'm not sure what the Global texture settings indicate! I always leave them at the highest setting. I think with a modern graphics card that is where it belongs.

I believe it may have to do with clamping the upper mips of an object texture's bitmapping. It shouldn't have anything to do with terrain.

Dick
 
Im trying to make the scenery for fs2004, problem is i cannot find any free sat images of changi singapore because the airport has taken on so many new projects since Google Earths image (plus it is really bad quality)

Thing is im trying to simpyly get the feel for the airport e.g. the highway and golf course on approach.

I know how to do custom taxiways, runways and aprons, i just want to achieve a high level of realism for the grass and other scenic area's including the golf course.

Best regards
Philip
 
Additionally how to other designers use sat images then for there ground textures in fs2004 as i have seen??

regards

Philip
 
Hi Phil ,
I am not much of a 2004 guy but I think it is much the same only harder to make photoreal scenery in 2004 with the resampler tool from the sdk.
The other method (again I have never attempted it) is to use gmax (or some modeling tool 3ds, fsds...) to produce your scenery around the airport and attache the imagery as a texture to that...I think :o .
The gmax/modeling method is for custom airport terrain. Most airports in the real world are not flat like they are in msfs. To make an airport with hilly terrain you eather need to model the hill or place a slopping flatness (with sbuilder or ade...)

Dick I believe you are right about the clamping the upper mips of an object texture's bitmapping. What I was wondering is if that would need adjustment with .60m or is that so low a res that it would not hit an upper mip?
Most people probably have that cranked with modern cards so it is probably not a factor anyway...

Sean
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top