London Photogrametry is messy

[Midnight Music 258]

30 minutes ago, Farlis said:

Photogrammetry was never designed to be looked at that close. It is perfectly adequate about 1500 feet.

And at least the buildings look EXACTLY like the look in real life as opposed to being just an autogen approximation.

Then what's the point of having detailed buildings? It's a waste of resources and it causes low FPS, even at 1500'

It's mostly Central London that's a disaster, it was so much better previously, other areas are slightly better, but maybe they can repair area this somehow.

Lee

[ca_metal 2,258]

1 hour ago, Midnight Music said:

Then what's the point of having detailed buildings? It's a waste of resources and it causes low FPS, even at 1500'

It's mostly Central London that's a disaster, it was so much better previously, other areas are slightly better, but maybe they can repair area this somehow.

Lee

The point is, some people like to see the more accurate cities from above. For those that don't like it, there's an option to turn it off. I was an alpha tester, we can't say much about the testings we did back then, but the photogrammetry was always like that (not so good when too close from it). Asobo/Microsoft can't do much, the data is "flawed".

With time, in the not so far future, I'm pretty sure the tech will evolve and become cheaper. This way we will probably see better and bigger coverage than now.

[Stelios 11]

An excellent update. Well done Asobo

[sidfadc 1,345]

ok I just loaded in over Canary Wharf, first time since the update to check out the views.  offensive initials not allowed has happened, not sure if what I'm seeing is correct.  Firstly there is horrible texture flickering everywhere, half the buildings are just flat 2D textures it looks terrible!!?

This is near the Tower of London - just flat 2d textures??  The horrible flickering would have to be shown from a video of course.

image upload

Edited February 17, 2021 by sidfadc

[dtrjones 356]

3 hours ago, andy1252 said:

I'm hoping this will settle down, and that maybe it's the server issues, but so far this looks awful to me. It may not look quite as bad in this shot but on a 40 inch screen at 4k and ultra settings, it's horrible  -

That doens't look that bad to me. Hey ho.

[dtrjones 356]

5 hours ago, ca_metal said:

I hope they improve everything. The landmark packs they did natively for MSFS are far superior than those they converted from other sims.

Comparing the night lighting of their Singapore and Paris packs with the London it’s clear the later can improve a lot. Not to talk about the quality of the landmarks and POIs.

Yeah but those companies weren't trying to push out a product on launch day and didn't really have any precedence to follow - no excuses though - I think Orbx have learned some leasons.

[cavaricooper 2,615]

Hopefully EVERYONE (including me) is learning that the Sim is in CONSTANT FLUX and the next several months should be spent sitting on one’s hands.

That said, I’m off to see what’s on sale 😉

C

[lambourne 211]

This was what I got over London earlier with Orbx buildings on.

 

Edited February 17, 2021 by lambourne

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,799]

Orbx issues aside ...

Melted buildings are not universal, not everyone gets them, they are potentially a sign of a bad photogrammetry download probably because of bad internet or an overloaded Microsoft server at the other end.  It also seems like once a building appears "melted" it gets cached somehow and stays that way on a particular system.

No idea if it will help but maybe deleting your rolling cache and trying again while connected to a different server is worth a try? 

Edited February 17, 2021 by Glenn Fitzpatrick

[JimBrown 596]

That looks very much like Bing Data is turned off. Check Options, Data.

...jim

2 hours ago, lambourne said:

This was what I got over London earlier with Orbx buildings on.

 

 

[John Fields 281]

Hi,

The buildings, cranes, etc., in London still appear to be seen as if they are melting contrasting with the modeled elements.

However, there are people that claim that they don't have this problem. I don't know if it is due to an Internet speed issue (I have 600 Gb and it usually works well).

In any case, I would like Orbx to adapt to this update its London Landmarks scenery soon.

[supersym 61]

I agree, very disappointed over London...

I realy ask myself if I shouldn't like better fly over London with P3D, and it is'nt a joke...

And I don't speak about the plane's behaviour (I's not the subject here)

 

[Shack95 2,700]

29 minutes ago, John Fields said:

In any case, I would like Orbx to adapt to this update its London Landmarks scenery soon.

They‘re working on it. It should be ready in a week or even less. 

https://orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/205264-compatibility-of-orbx-landmarks-london-city-pack-with-microsoft-world-update-united-kingdom/

All in all I think London looks pretty good with photogrammetry. It might not be the best PG we’ve seen and there are certainly some weird buildings, esp. some of the taller ones such as Barkleys Bank HQ in Canary Wharf or Principal Tower in Shoreditch, but most of the smaller houses look quite good as long as you don‘t fly at 100ft. If Orbx can replace the taller structures and clean up some of the artifacts this should look great. My only worry is that the handcrafted buildings could stick out too much.

[Javiz 104]

Doesn't look half bad to me :

[Farlis 2,447]

14 hours ago, ca_metal said:

but the photogrammetry was always like that

Of course it was. That is simply a limitation of the technology.

 

I suggest anybody who thinks it is subpar in the sim just check out Google Earth, find some coverage and then zoom in to similar levels as. It will look just as bad.