• 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.

can't find textures to ORBX scenery

S

steveh2112

Messages
112
Country
unitedkingdom
i installed the free Yosemite valley orbx terrain which looks great except for el cap and half dome which look great from a distance and awful up close.

those two mountains are special cases, they are made with objects, not scenery, it turns out they are made with 2kx2k scenery textures which isn't nearly enough. i made a better looking model with 4k x 4k, just for the main wall, but i rather not use objects at all.

so i deleted ElCapitan.BGL. to see what the underlying scenery looks like and its a ok, good shape compared to the real thing but the texturing looks bad, but i'd like to try fix that. but i cannot find the textures anywhere for the scenery part. the textures for the models are in C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Games\Microsoft Flight Simulator X\ORBX\FTX_NA\FTX_AA_YOSEMITE\texture but they are only for the objects

any ideas where to find? by the way, its not the default FSX scenery i'm seeing, i tried that and it is beyond awful

i guess i'm still a bit unclear about the whole scenery vs. object thing in FSX. i've made a lot of scenery objects for FSX and put them in addon scenery but i know they act different to real static scenery. you can fly through objects (with crash detection off) but not scenery so there is a big difference, but i don't get it.
 
Last edited:
Hi Steve:

Please post a screenshot of what you are describing so we can better identify what textures may be implicated in your scenario.

Also, please tell us if you have OrbX FTX Global and/or OrbX FTX Northern California region pack installed and set "active" for NA Blue (North America) via the OrbX FTX Central configuration utility, as this may determine what land class textures are draped upon the underlying "Terrain" ground surface (including textures draped onto the existing 'shape' of El Capitan as provided via the 'active' terrain mesh file displayed with "top priority" for that area).


PS: Holger Sandmann comments on the methods used by Frank Dainese here:

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/86460-yosemite-valley-freeware/page-3#entry790858


Frank Dainese comments on the methods he used here:

http://www.orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/86460-yosemite-valley-freeware/page-3#entry791342


Google-translated link to Frank's Blog:

http://translate.google.com/transla...010/11/working-progressin-3d.html&prev=search

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
you can see the problem with El Cap here

the ORBX texture file is 2048x2048 = 4MP. its covering an area of about 2000x1000 meters so that 2,000,000 sqm so that's 2 pixel per square meter so not surprising it doesn't look good close up

i have OrbX FTX Global but i don't have norcal but i read that isn't necessary for the yosemite pack to work. it is working, its just i need better resolution on the el cap and half dome and the merced river.

i guess most people are flying at 30,000ft, i spend most of my time at 30 feet so image quality is a big deal.

also, if you notice that video around 8 minutes where i'm flying above the merced river, you can see the river is indented (i guess the land is, but the water shouldn't be). i'd love to fix that too. any ideas how? google earth's version of this is far far better. i know how to get topo and high res images from google earth and load into FSX as a scenery object, i just made 2 videos about that:
but doing that for an area about 1km x 5km seems like a lot of work, tiling and placing multiple scenery objects. i'd rather just go in and fix the orbx textures.
 
Last edited:
Hi Steve:

Assuming you do not have OrbX NorCal region pack payware or any other 3rd party terrain mesh installed and set "active" for the area surrounding Yosemite, but you do have OrbX Yosemite freeware add-on installed and set "active", you would likely be displaying the "MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL" terrain mesh, which was limited in its detail by the original use of 10 Meter DEM source data for that area.

Assuming you do not have OrbX Yosemite freeware add-on installed and set "active", you would likely be displaying the FSX default terrain mesh which was limited in its detail (and thus its 'accuracy') by ACES via their original use of 30 Meter DEM source data for the USA area.


NOTE: When in a flight over areas with only FSX default terrain mesh loaded, setting the FSX GUI menu terrain mesh slider to higher resolution creates "artificial / fictional" data points interpolated (over-sampled) from the internal 30 meter grid of elevation data points within the default terrain mesh file(s).


If you have the freeware Yosemite add-on package installed and have disabled the 3D scenery object for El Capitan as well as the "MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL" terrain mesh in that package, you would likely be displaying the FSX default terrain mesh draped with OrbX freeware Yosemite replacement custom "Ortho#.BGL" et.seq. photo-real land class terrain textures.

If you have disabled the 3D scenery object for El Capitan in "ElCapitan.BGL", the "MeshYosemiteValleyHD" terrain mesh, and the "Ortho#.BGL" et.seq. photo-real land class terrain textures in the freeware Yosemite add-on package, you would likely be displaying the FSX default terrain mesh draped with OrbX FTX Global replacement land class terrain textures.


FYI: It is possible to make via FSX SDK Resample, higher resolution custom land class photo-real replacement textures which will drape (aka "mesh-clinging") onto the FSX 30 meter default terrain mesh (or a custom terrain mesh of higher resolution such as the 10 meter OrbX NorCal region pack payware and/or 10 meter 'MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL' in that freeware add-on package).


BTW: It is also possible to make via FSX SDK Resample, custom higher-resolution replacement terrain mesh which will be displayed with higher priority than the FSX default terrain mesh (or a custom terrain mesh of higher resolution such as the 10 meter OrbX NorCal region pack payware and/or 10 meter MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL in that freeware add-on package).


To make such custom higher resolution add-on content, one would have to gain access to:

* aerial imagery (ex: > LOD16 / 0.5 meter/pixel - thus 0.25 meter/pixel or better)

...and:

* DEM data (ex: > LOD10 / 38.4 meter elevation data point grid - thus 19.2, 9.6, 4.8, 2.4, or 1.2 meter or better IFSAR / LIDAR data)

...then process them via GIS software into source data at the projection / datum required by FSX SDK Resample.


PS: The Merced river can be rendered more accurately by use of higher resolution custom terrain mesh and/or modification of the existing terrain mesh display, via creation of custom vector terrain "flatten" polygons output to BGL by FSX SDK SHP2VEC ...which alter the 'shape' of the active terrain mesh being displayed at top priority in the area of interest.


Hope this helps with better interpreting the scenario you described above. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
wow, that's a lot to digest, thanks. i actually did find a nice lidar model of El Cap here http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:270312

i grabbed that onto blender, had to remesh it from a different (front) perspective but it looks great now (well, the mesh shape looks great). but i've spent hours going through 20+ MP photos of El Cap and stitching stuff together but unable to get any really nice detail in a single 4k x 4k photo. the only other thing i can think of to do is tile lots of hi res pics like these
https://theblondecoyote.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/p9281134.jpg
https://thenetwork512.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/img_6779.jpg
together and subdivide the model into many mesh blocks each with its own texture, but that sounds like a lot of work, and maybe render slow in FSX

also, the topography of the area which i assume is from MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL is way off reality, i guess that's why Orbx built a scenery object for El Cap and blended it in. but the scenery object they made isn't close to reality either. that lidar mesh link is very accurate, and here's a nice side view showing the upper half is almost vertical https://maccinirvtravels.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/el-capitan.jpg and this shows the lower nose is very prominent http://images.summitpost.org/original/257149.jpg

the problem is if i use that accurate lidar model, it doesn't blend into the existing scenery at all well, i have to move is so far south, it leaves a giant void behind, and i don't feel like redoing the entire north wall to Yosemite falls

anyhow, i'll reread your post a few times and dig around for the MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL and its textures and see what i can do with patching, vs creating new.

i also need to read up on how real scenery is made, vs. scenery objects
 
Last edited:
Hi Steve:

The images you linked above would certainly look good as textures on a 3D object. :cool:

It is theoretically possible to render the "shape" of El Capitan entirely within the FSX terrain mesh, as it has a slight slope without overly perceptible overhangs or projecting cliffs.


However, one must ensure that end users set their FSX terrain mesh sliders at very high resolutions and at 100 % complexity to allow proper display of such a supplied custom terrain mesh.


Also, a "gotcha" with the FSX terrain rendering process (as in many other 3D world terrain rendering engines) is that textures are draped from a single direction, and distortion of the original uni-planar 2D image results due to stretching (aka "rubber-sheeting") as the image 'mesh-clings' to all ex: Z-axis surface elevations above the lowest local base plane of the object surface in 3D space.

Thus we have the dreaded "sci-fi leopard skin effect" when using standard uni-directional texture drapes over widely varied elevations.


If one uses a super-imposed "shell" consisting of a 3D object, one can control the direction, size, orientation, and position of the texture drapes, however that 'shell' must be kept a minimum distance of ex: 0.15 to 0.20 meters / 6 to 8 inches (or more !) above the underlying terrain surface to prevent graphical anomalies (flickering / moire etc.) when seen from differing altitudes / angles of view in FSX at run time.

One might wonder if somehow 3D rather than 2D "flat" G-Polys could be used so that textures would drape and blend onto the FSX terrain without "Z-buffer-fighting" graphical artifacts.

IIRC, the 1.2 meter "hi-resolution photo-real" textures generated by SBuilder for FS9 may have been this type of 'legacy' object, but despite its texture resolution, AFAIK, it can only be draped onto a custom-matched custom terrain mesh with a maximum resolution of LOD-8.

NOTE: A few early FS8 / FS9 versions of Gottfried Razek's "Blue Sky" photo-real sceneries used this method, but some users had issues with limited visibility distance for the textured "photo-mesh" which allowed underlying ex: default terrain to 'pop-up' from below.



IMHO, it seems best to pursue the 3D model method, providing that if one uses downloaded DEM data, it is first re-projected in a GIS program into either UTM (aka "flat earth" in old ESRI ArcGIS syntax) or perhaps better yet, Mercator datum / Google Earth Spherical Mercator ('modified' EPSG 3857) projection ...as discussed here:

https://alastaira.wordpress.com/2011/01/23/the-google-maps-bing-maps-spherical-mercator-projection/


After a downloaded DEM / point cloud data set is re-projected as above, one can then be more likely to have the correct "shape" for the 3D object when exported and compiled for display in the FSX 3D rendered world. :pushpin:


BTW: You may wish to download "bare earth" LIDAR-derived data sets for Yosemite from the NSF Open Topography Facility at:

http://opentopo.sdsc.edu/gridsphere/gridsphere?cid=datasets

Registration is free at that web site, and one can access more data types after registration. ;)


PS: You may need to initially cull data points from copies of highly complex terrain data sets in ex: "MeshLab" to avoid 'bug-splats' or un-manageably slow performance in Sketchup or other 3D modeling applications. :idea:


Hope this helps a bit more ! :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
hi again gary, i went to the open topo site, found a .laz file which i don't think is the right one so need to keep looking, converted to a .las file, and i'm using something called cloudcompare to view it. but i don't see anything to convert it to a mesh so i can use in blender, anyhow, i'm still looking into that.

i tried to open MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL in MCX (stable and dev) and it says no models found, so no sure what's next for that. i have a question through, are the textures in the .BGL? i though that was basically the mesh. i notice the file is only 18MB so it can't be the textures for the whole thing right?

thanks
 
Hi Steve:

MeshYosemiteValleyHD.BGL is a FSX proprietary format terrain mesh file which will not open in MCX, but can be viewed in FSX SDK TMFViewer; AFAIK, there is currently no utility in the public domain which will both open and allow export of the HeightField-type data in such a file.


IMHO, one must first open and re-project a downloaded ex: LIDAR-derived data set file in a GIS program which can then export the data to a format which accurately represents the shape it will have when rendered as a 3D object within FSX at run time ...as described in my post immediately above.

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/cant-find-textures-to-orbx-scenery.433093/#post-701303


Because the data density of LIDAR point clouds are normally far beyond what is feasible to process in most 3D modeling applications and output to a model for use in FSX, one shall likely need to cull varying amounts of data points by means of a program such as "MeshLab", which has tools for 'simplification' (think: lower LOD creation). :idea:

http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/

A review of the web page linked above will identify the point cloud file format which MeshLab can import / convert / export.


Personally, I use Global Mapper whenever possible for GIS data processing, but a number of other GIS applications are available that are freeware such as QGIS, GDALWarp, OGR, FWTools, GRASS, etc., which have been discussed here at FSDeveloper forums.

If you identify one which can open one a LIDAR-derived file output format offered by OpenTopo for Yosemite ex: in the selected area immediately around El Capitan, you would want to re-project to the desired format, then export as one of the file types which can be opened by ex: MeshLab (or perhaps also by your choice of other 3D modeling application if it can handle large data sets).

After modification of the already re-projected LIDAR-derived data set in a 3D modeling application, one can export to a more correctly shaped 3D model for use in FSX.

Hope this overview helps with further developing your workflow. :)

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
hi Gary, i've re-read your posts now i understand the difference between FSX terrain mesh files and 3D mesh objects a bit better. i've got quite proficient at making, texture mapping and placing 3D mesh objects so i'm replacing the Orbx objects for El Cap and Half Dome with my own hi res versions and will probably leave it at that, since the rest of the Orbx model looks pretty good.

The only downside to this plan is since I fly with crash detection off (it would be almost impossible for anyone to complete my race circuit without crashing I think), then I can fly right trough the scenery objects i've created. I don't think there is any way around this, i guess its something i have to live with.
 
Hi Steve:

Turning off crash detection is done in either of 2 ways:

* Throughout the entire FSX simulation itself via the FSX GUI Menu (IMHO, not a preferred method)

* On a per-object basis in the settings for a MDL via ex: the MCX GUI menu (IMHO, the preferred method)


The ability to "bounce off" or crash during contact (depending on one's angle of attack and flight dynamics etc.) is achieved by attaching a invisible clone of the ex: textured rock surface slightly beneath the top /external /visble surface ...with a "platform" attribute set to "hardened / concrete" for its texture by name via the MCX GUI menu Attached Object Editor as discussed here:

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/crash-detection.433058/#post-700949

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=ModelConverterX#Attached_object_editor



For surfaces other than those intended to be a "non-crashing surface", they can also have the extent of their "crash-boxes" adjusted to a minimal extent surrounding their surfaces via MCX GUI under Exporter Settings > BGLWriter > CrashboxGranularity:

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=ModelConverterX#BGLWriter

http://www.scenerydesign.org/author/arno/page/74/

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/crash-box-size.65832/

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/how-to-delete-crash-boxes-in-bgl.361815/

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/performance-with-set-crash-box-granularity.249255/

NOTE: A 3D model "crash box" is distinct and separate from a "bounding box" :pushpin:


Hope this helps with fine-tuning your model's run-time characteristics for your race mission. :)


PS: Hmmm... it might be fun to do a "vertical touch-and-go" off the face of El Capitan during a "lateral approach" ! :cool:

GaryGB
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top