• 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.

FSXA SbuilderX Canadian Satellite Server?

Messages
90
Country
unitedstates
Are there any Canadian Satellite Servers we can use in SbuilderX313? I'm working along the northern shore of Lake Erie, and run into various issues across the three servers from Google, VirtualEarth, and Yahoo. Some have 'truncated' imagery, like they don't want you to be able to use it for anything. You can see things just fine in background view until you try to add a 'map', then you get either half the image you expected, or sometimes no image at all, using zoom level 12 in the main window with levels 12-15 selected when creating the map. Google seems to provide the most consistently usable imagery in this area, but the other issue is that some of it is low resolution. I have 2 'maps' I did that shift from higher to lower resolution within the bmp and bgl itself, and I can't manage to fix it.

So I am wondering if there is any actual Canadian satellite server we can use as an alternative. It seems like our US based servers don't want to support the Canadian imagery or something.
 
I haven't as yet heard of any. The issue you present is what IA am seeing in the FrenchPolynesian area. white patches; try to paint them out- = black patches after resample. i posted this here and at SBX. No answer there- 20 views. No answer here- 69 views. I can't believe NO ONE has ever run into this or found an answer to this.

Out of almost 70 viewers you would think ONE guy would at least have some kind of answr... maybe - not yor fault... low res in many areas. Or... white patch means no image for that piece.... OR - I know but I ain't a tellin' ya.... or I dunno,man. Or - not my job! :) Oh, well. Bob
 
Thanks, jyarddog, for the reply.

I posted on the FlightSim.com forum back in mid-October when I started this project. No sign of life there. The 94 page tutorial there, with which I learned how to do what I am doing, has some issues and I was hoping to talk to someone about them. But it doesn't seem anyone is interested.

One thing I did discover on my own. That tutorial uses the freeware graphics manipulation program called GIMP. I learned that I can use the tools in GIMP to fix the kinds of areas you mentioned in your reply. I had some buildings which had white roofs, and for some reason were getting 'painted' with water class in the photo-realistic scenery I am doing as they were compiled into a BGL file. I was able to copy the roof image of a nearby building, complete with ventilation fans, and paste it in blocks atop the white roofed building, which fixed the problem. GIMP can also remedy the blown out colors I have often seen in Canadian satellite imagery.
 
Gimp is very good. I went ahead and bought PSPX4- corel bought PSPX from Jasc a while back. I foiund it was around $49 something. I got it and many upgrades to pspx4 - quite resonable when I thought that some of these paint programs can get upwards of $600-700. or so.

There are draw programs for a lot but I don't thnk I need them. Anway this project does sound interesting. Keep me posted, and others.

i sought help learning photoreal. I was sent much info and pictures which helped some but people - bless their helpfull hearts- do not know how to teach. I am a retired school teacher. First assess what the student knows or does not know. do not assume he is a brain surgeon like yourself! :) Otherwise you start of with terms your student hears and goes.... huh?

Months went by and after asking certain questions and study I learned the basics. Later, I taught 3 other guys how to do photoreal - each .. in 20 minutes. Anyway- the people here are great folks.... every one. (Tiny Tim?) :) Bob
 
These people here most certainly are good folks! I've received some great tips and instruction from them! I started out wanting to learn how to edit panels, and I did achieve my end goal by rather circuitous means, since MS switched to XML gauges and pretty much did not leave any breadcrumbs at all. But I learned how to overlay some gauges I wanted in my own custom panel and how to make it automatically show again when I switch between cockpit and external views. Next I got into placing 3D scenery objects and using tools like SBuilderX, RWY12 Object Placer, and Instant Scenery 2.

My project now is this - I bought some nice photorealistic scenery of several US states, including my home state of Ohio. Sadly, the vendor has gone out of business. But the imagery was made from Google Satellite imagery. Google made a terribly ugly mess of the Lake Erie shoreline, extending some weird patchy repeating green gradient miles from shore, so FSX doesn't even render it as water. Looks so bad from the air I finally could no longer bear it and started researching how to fix it. I found a 94 page tutorial on how to make one's own photorealistic scenery, by a fellow named Tiberius if I remember correctly. The lesson did a makeover on the tiny island of Nauru in the Atlantic Ocean.

I took what I learned there, and adapted the techniques to work along Lake Erie shorelines. I worked my way along the entire Ohio and Michigan coasts so far, as well as all the Lake Erie Islands, including the Canadian ones, and the results speak for themselves. It looks much more real now, especially because the satellite imagery has been recently updated with better clarity. But then I noticed the completely ugly rendering FSX does in the areas of Long Point Ontario Canada and Erie PA. Both of those peninsulas have very unusual and attractive geology for the lakeshore and FSX basically made them both holes in the water.
I first ran into the issue of lousy Canadian imagery with Pelee Island. Neither Yahoo nor Virtual Earth (my preferred source for US imagery) would even give me the entire island at any resolution. They would provide a slice of it, surrounded by blank background. Very strange. Google will give it up but only if I don't try to go very high in resolution, however their coloring for Canada is very blown out and ugly compared to the US images. This is why I looked for another image source alternative for Canada. No one has provided any answers. So I worked with the screwy colors and used GIMP a lot to fix them.

The tutorial tells how to use watermask and blendmask layers atop a base image layer in GIMP to depict shallower water near a shoreline. It does look more real, but his technique leaves a very sharply defined line where the water color lightens considerably. After I had done all the above my son came home for an early Xmas visit. He asked me if there wasn't some way to make the transformation more real looking. After several hours of practicing with various tools and gradients, we hit upon a technique that yields impressively realistic color gradient from deeper to shallower water. Now I am going back and applying this technique in coastal areas where the shallower water is prominent, such as the Erie PA basin which has a deeper center, but a lot of shallow coastline.

All in all it is fun to do and I am learning many new things. And it makes FSX much more enjoyable. One of my first disappointments in all the many versions of FS I have bought was that my home area looked nothing like it should. Now it really does look like home.

Edit- I added a screenshot that shows work in progress between the ugly effect in the water I am removing, and the improved appearance of the shoreline once completed. All that ugly pea green area in the bay near Marblehead peninsula got corrected through these efforts. This is an old shot of when I was first getting started.
 

Attachments

  • Example of ugly water before and after fix.png
    Example of ugly water before and after fix.png
    334.4 KB · Views: 619
Last edited:
Water color light to dark- could you smudge between the two like you would in your tif? I did something similar at Alameda working on the bmp to blend the lighter water to darker. I lowered opacity and hardness for a bit more control and also so I could see the moving water from FSX through it all. Could that help? Bob
 
Water color light to dark- could you smudge between the two like you would in your tif? I did something similar at Alameda working on the bmp to blend the lighter water to darker. I lowered opacity and hardness for a bit more control and also so I could see the moving water from FSX through it all. Could that help? Bob

That might help. But the method we are using has to do with feathering the edges of the Blendmask.bmp we create in the tutorial. It is 25-75% black on pure white, drawn along the lines where you want the transition to shallower water to fall. Then it is filled in. We played with the airbrush setting, inverting the foreground color to black and background color to white. Then after adjusting the settings as desired for things like Rate and Flow, I just have to 'paint' with the airbrush along the hard edge of the black border. It applies a white gradient that keeps getting lighter if you go over it more than once.

Once the Blendmask.bmp is reworked like above, the resample.exe utilty (from the FSX SDK) is used to process it, the Watermask,bmp (which you draw and fill to tell FSX where the water's boundaries are) and the base image layer (gathered from satellite imagery by SBuilderX313) and it chews on them for awhile and spits out the required BGL file to make it all appear in FSX once you load it in the Scenery Library.

The Blendmask layer is partially transparent as seen by FSX, so it lets the underlying coloring show through a little, depending upon what percentage of black is there. Where problems start is when the water in the satellite imagery is white or shiny silver, like it was in the poorly rendered imagery around Long Point. I had to erase all that from the base photo layer bitmap and fill the area in with a dark blue-green color, because it was trying to make the shallow water look like dayglo powder blue. :) Not very realistic for that part of the world.

I attached a couple pictures to show what I am doing. This is for part of the Erie PA harbor area. Blendmask B4 Gradient is the one used prior to developing our technique, and it yields very definitive changes in color in the main basin of the bay. I'll try to get some screen shots later, but I would need to load the old scenery files vs. the new scenery files to show the differences as seen in FSX. The Blendmask Gradient picture is what the edges of the blendmask look like after we do our voodoo. Note the fuzziness in the basin area. This is where the water makes its gradual color change, which you will be able to see once I post the screen shots.

When we don't want the wide gradient, such as the hard edges of shipping channels or against deep water piers or cliffs, we leave out the gradient in that area.

Edit : I just added more photos, showing Erie PA using the 2 different kinds of blendmask files. I also added a photo showing how the underlying image color changes can affect how the water looks when the tutorial is used to make the scenery. In this example our gradient was applied. But I need to go back and actually edit the colors at the point where these two BGL files meet, to try and obscure this issue a bit. As far as trying to get the color tones on the LAND imagery to match up across BGL areas, that is a whole different kettle of fish. Anyone who has worked with these satellite images can attest to that! The colors will vary, sometimes a lot, from area to area. It usually isn't easy, or practical, to try to match them up when there are wide variances.
 

Attachments

  • Erie Blendmask B4 Gradient.png
    Erie Blendmask B4 Gradient.png
    60.3 KB · Views: 497
  • Erie Blendmask Gradient Applied'.png
    Erie Blendmask Gradient Applied'.png
    97.9 KB · Views: 514
  • Erie PA WITHOUT Gradient Blendmask.png
    Erie PA WITHOUT Gradient Blendmask.png
    221.7 KB · Views: 563
  • Erie PA with Gradient Blendmask.png
    Erie PA with Gradient Blendmask.png
    215.4 KB · Views: 539
  • Gradient Blend shoreline from Map View above.png
    Gradient Blend shoreline from Map View above.png
    125.9 KB · Views: 536
Last edited:
I edited a previous post and added a screenshot that shows what it is I set out to accomplish. I just couldn't bear to keep flying over such poor looking scenery here. :)
 
Back
Top