How good is better? Payware mesh or not?

[grunau_baby]

Hi,

just like to know your experiences with these mesh products: http://www.fsdreamscapes.com/store/cart.php?target=category&category_id=4

They are at special offer, so I thought about it. Does it really add noticably for the slow and low?

Any input is welcome.
Alex

[tigisfat]

They are good products, but they severely plateau most of your airports to the point of being unrealistic. Also, never buy an unfinished product at a discount from them.

I bought his Utah photoreal scenery with the promise that it would be completed and airports would be lined up. WAAAAAY later I emailed him to ask about updates I hadn't see, and he said I was welcome to fix it myself and that he wouldn't be doing it because he'd moved on. THANKS.

[spatialpro]

Are you sure they are on special offer?? They look like regular prices to me.

They definitely add realism for those flying low and slow, and FSdreamscapes are some of the best around. They use Digitial Elevation Models (DEM, or "mesh" for FS-ers) derived from Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR)... which just rolls of the tongue! Without going into the science (although I gladly will if asked!) this technique allows large areas to be covered at a horizontal spacing good enough for almost any FS low 'n' slow flying (i.e. 5 metres).

It doesn't work so well where there are sharp breaks in slope, e.g. near-vertical cliffs. The only viable alternative is airborne laser scanning (ALS, or LiDAR), which also has a smaller horizontal spacing (mostly 1 metre, the max for FSX), but the areas covered are tiny compared to InSAR and the costs are therefore higher and thus it has yet to break into mainstream FS. Again, happy to do "the science bit" on laser scanning too if anyone asks...!

HTH??!!

Andy

[NoNewMessages]

... which also has a smaller horizontal spacing (mostly 1 metre, the max for FSX),

I thought I had made some that came through at .59m resolution? Will need to try and find that source again.


And I'm being careful with my words here, but yes, higher res mesh can enhance the view, especially flying low and slow. I flew over an area a few days back and saw where a small pond was set down into the terrain just so nicely. Only by having accurate mesh and flying at a speed to let it render can you see such detail. Having airports where they should be and blended into the surrounding terrain is nice also. Having good photo work to show it off.... PRICELESS!

[spatialpro]

I thought I had made some that came through at .59m resolution? Will need to try and find that source again.

Indeed, I've got some at 50cm, but it comes out at 1m in FSX so far as I can tell.

Trying not to sound competitive here, but I also know some that was flown at 20cm (fixed wing) and less (by helicopter), plus I've done terrestrial laser scanning at work down to 1mm... but all of that is another story/thread! Getting off topic here!

Andy

[crashaz]

I find FS Dreamscapes (NEXTMap Pro Mesh) latest work to be incredible!

Which mesh are you interested in?


The real difference between the payware and freeware... for the most part..... is that the payware version typically has the all the voids and resampling cleaned up very well. Also their source information is much better than what us freeware designers can get... which we gather from USGS free.

The platforms at airports issue.... well techniques are still being looked at to address.... depends on the designer.

[tigisfat]

The platforms at airports issue.... well techniques are still being looked at to address.... depends on the designer.


FS Dreamscapes appears to not address it, or even the lining up of airports. Again, speaking from experience here.

[crashaz]

Been a common issue for awhile as the very detailed mesh really brings out the elevation data that Aces used.

Here is a thread on it back in 2008. Looks like talk of void and blend.

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8481


Also looks like Ver 3.0 will address the issues but will not start until ver 2.0 series finished.

http://fsdreamscapes.blogspot.com/

Maybe Holger can jump in and offer comment on how elevation is addressed in latest technologies.


Right now though... best bet is to use ADE to remove and readd the airport flatten to the proper height. The super detailed mesh looks fantastic as I can make out beaches and shoreline heights.

[NoNewMessages]

Been a common issue for awhile as the very detailed mesh really brings out the elevation data that Aces used.

I would say it's common knowledge that Microsoft uses "next to no" resolution mesh around the airports. It's difficult to get plateaus when the source is 1.2km between data points. With the U.S. having 38m resolution, even adding another 38m mesh to the area "overwrites" the default 1.2km around the airports and can cause plateaus. So long as the FS line has flat airport areas, there will be plateaus. And the only way to address that issue is to make sure the airport is properly located and elevated (probably 80% are not) and to work on some type of blending method to the flattened area. Or the alternative is to take the Microsoft method and extend it to all airports in a coverage area. I have no problem with "cutting holes" in a mesh product to eliminate plateaus, so long as it covers all airports in the coverage area. Might try doing that some day....

[grunau_baby]

Which mesh are you interested in?
Since I keep flying in central Europe mainly it´s my area of choice.

I am tempted to purchase Germany-mesh and replace my German landmarks mesh with it. But I am affraid of ruining (I have a strong feeling I will) the rest of the addon, too. The new mesh might cause conflicts with the many placed custom objects and custom landclass I fear.

Another choice would be Austria or Switzerland, these Alps-countries should really bring the best out off a new mesh, moreover I don´t use many other scenery-addons there, so the damage might be ignorable.

The plateau issue with airports is something I might live with, though it does not look too fancy, but the default airport look is not too good anyway IMHO. Default airports I only use to quickly get out off;-)

Alex