Annotator Question - FSX

[falcon409]

I have been using the annotator for many years now to place trees over photoreal ground textures. Despite using the individual squares to more precisely place autogen (a suggestion I got from Holder Sandman years ago) I still have problems with trees showing up where there are no trees placed in the annotator. Individual trees displaying in the center of the runway, when, according to the annotator there isn't a tree within 50' of the runway. Also, seasonal changes will cause fractured effects as well, trees appear and disappear according to the seasons. If I have trees planted in my yard that have grown to a decent size they don't go away during certain times of the year based on seasons, lol.

It can be very frustrating when I'm trying to give anyone who downloads my scenery the same experience and some have no problems and others have trees blocking the runway. What gives?

 

[GaryGB]

I have been using the annotator for many years now to place trees over photo-real ground textures.

Despite using the individual squares to more precisely place autogen (a suggestion I got from Holder Sandman years ago) I still have problems with trees showing up where there are no trees placed in the annotator.

Individual trees displaying in the center of the runway, when, according to the annotator there isn't a tree within 50' of the runway.

[EDITED]

Hi Ed:

There are multiple layers from which Autogen trees may show through to the top of the Airport Background Polygon (aka "ABP") at airports (as well as in scenery areas outside airports).

AFAIK, in all cases, instructions for display of those trees come from *an.AGN annotation files mapped to 1 or more textured terrain polygons.


Typical scenarios where trees may "pop up to the top" of ones scenery:


1.) Base local default land class that has mapped *an.AGN annotation files when Exclude Autogen has not been included in the ABP GUIDs


2.) ABP land class associated with a "MaskClassMap" attribute when Exclude Autogen has not been included in the ABP GUIDs


NOTE: AFAIK "most" developers prevent autogen display from the land class 'mask' mapped via "MaskClassMap" onto the ABP as a terrain texture by using the Exclude Autogen attribute.

If that 'Exclude Autogen' attribute is not used for the ABP, one may end up seeing Autogen from the land class specified by the "MaskClassMap" attribute.


3.) Custom photo-real aerial imagery (technically a special form of land class ) made by FS SDK Resample that, regardless of having-, or not having-, its own mapped *an.AGN annotation files, when Exclude Autogen has not been included in the polygon GUIDs of ABP.

Also, if greater extents of transparency have been implemented by the developer within the Blend Mask, this may allow Autogen from underlying layers to "pop through to the top" of the ABP.


NOTE: When custom photo-real aerial imagery is created by FS SDK Resample using Blend Masks, depending on what extent of transparency is utilized in order to allow display of underlying default or custom 3rd party land class (or other custom photo-real aerial imagery), one may cross a threshold where Autogen from such underlying scenery might be displayed through to the top of ones scenery on the ground in FS at run time.


FYI: Scruffyduck has a tutorial (adapted IIUC, from one or more tutorials previously posted by Jim Vile) which may merit review for this scenario:

http://scruffyduck.screenstepslive....l/204018-why-are-there-are-trees-on-my-runway


Jim Vile's "Land Class Visibility" Tutorial:

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/landclass-visibility-problem.15173/

Jim's CAVEAT:

"IMPORTANT, a few poly land classes such as cement can lay on top the Mask Class Map but most cannot. If I place a poly land class on top of the Mask Class Map this can confuse what FSX will actually show."



BTW: You may recall Jim Keir's "Lumberjack" Autogen Exclusion ABP's that extended outwards 3x and 5x the RWY width for default airports.

http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fsxscen&DLID=108847

http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fsxscen&DLID=108853


"Lumberjack" CVX vector polygons are un-textured ABP's that only use the {6c0c6528-5cf1-483a-a586-2c905cf2757e} ExcludeAutogen GUID.

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526968.aspx


AFAIK:

* If one always makes ABP's with top layer display priority using the "triple-attribute" GUID:

{46bfb3bd-ce68-418e-8112-feba17428ace} Flatten + MaskClassMap + ExcludeAutogen


...or:

* If one always makes ABP's with top layer display priority using the "double-attribute" GUID:

{18580A63-FC8F-4A02-A622-8A1E073E627B} Flatten + ExcludeAutogen

< This object is un-textured, and therefore has no land class or Autogen mapped to it via a *an.AGN file >


..."Trees on RWYs / T-Ways" should not occur.


https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc707102.aspx#Airport_Boundaries_


If, however, such ABP anomalies are seen only when OrbX FTX Global / Regions / Airports / Land Class or Vector are installed and set 'active', then perhaps it might be time once again for Holger to offer comment and a suggested work-around.



CAVEAT: A few other "gotcha's" resulting from how ACES programmed FSX ...just to keep life as a FS developer 'entirely too complicated':

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/cvx-files.434746/

Also, seasonal changes will cause fractured effects as well, trees appear and disappear according to the seasons. If I have trees planted in my yard that have grown to a decent size they don't go away during certain times of the year based on seasons, lol.

It can be very frustrating when I'm trying to give anyone who downloads my scenery the same experience and some have no problems and others have trees blocking the runway.

What gives?

1 or more underlying Land Class textures with mapped *an.AGN files allowed to "pop through to the top" ...may change with the seasons.

IMHO, one may still need to investigate what underlying scenery layer(s) is/are being allowed to "pop through to the top", and why that is not being excluded by a ABP (placed in a layer underneath the Custom Photo-real layer).

[END_EDIT]

Hope these initial suggestions may help !

GaryGB

 

[falcon409]

Gary, Sorry to say that based on my original question these examples have nothing to do with the current problem. I do not use Airport Backgrounds, I use only photoreal ground textures resampled to a "photo01.bgl" file. Any default airport background that is present at an airport I redo is removed prior to starting the project. The "out of place" trees are in the center of the ground texture, completely away from the edges of the blur and unaffected by the transparency issue you mention. Each and every tree is placed manually to a position shown on the ground texture while working in the annotator, so I can see exactly where the trees should be placed. Despite that placement precision I will have trees display in places they should not be, in places where there are none placed in the annotator.

 

[arno]

The FS engine does rasterize the autogen data and then display the trees based on this raster. In the FSX.cfg file you can specify the size/resolution of this raster. You can try to increase the resolution and see if that improves the situation.

 

[GaryGB]

Gary,

Sorry to say that based on my original question these examples have nothing to do with the current problem.

I'm inclined to re-assert that exploration of those example scenarios presented may reveal causes for the above Autogen display anomalies.

I do not use Airport Backgrounds, I use only photo-real ground textures resampled to a "photo01.bgl" file.

Any default airport background that is present at an airport I redo is removed prior to starting the project.

Bearing in mind that in FSX / P3D, legacy BGLComp XML "autogen exclude rectangles" in airport or other BGLs no longer work, and that ABPs are CVX vector objects, what GUID(s) do you use for the CVX Vector Exclude BGL(s) intended to remove "...Any default airport background that is present at an airport I redo" ?

NOTE: This acknowledges that some-, if not all- default Airport Boundary / Background Polygons (aka "ABP"s) may have had MaskClassMap as a part of the "triple attribute" 'meta-GUID' used in those CVX vector objects.

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/cannot-exclude-airport-background.431027/

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc707102.aspx#VectorAttributes


And since you reportedly don't use ABP's, do you otherwise use a CVX Vector Exclude BGL(s) to remove Autogen "...at an airport I redo" ?

< Of course it's only a technicality of syntax that ABP's are officially referred to by the MS FSX / ESP / P3D SDK as a "Airport Boundary" Polygon >

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc707102.aspx#Airport_Boundaries_

The "out of place" trees are in the center of the ground texture, completely away from the edges of the blur and unaffected by the transparency issue you mention.

IIUC, when you use the term "ground texture", you are referring to your custom photo-real aerial imagery created by FS SDK Resample using Blend Masks ?

Each and every tree is placed manually to a position shown on the ground texture while working in the annotator, so I can see exactly where the trees should be placed.

Despite that placement precision I will have trees display in places they should not be, in places where there are none placed in the annotator.

[EDITED]

IMHO, that is evidence that the Autogen is being allowed to "pop through to the top" from *an.AGN files mapped to other land class layers below your custom photo-real aerial imagery created by FS SDK Resample using Blend Masks, as AFAIK, Autogen vegetation will only display as a result of the instructions provided by default or 3rd party *an.AGN files mapped to land class layers.

In other < rare ? > cases, Autogen may also display when mapped to custom CVX vector objects via Terrain.Cfg.

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/autogen-exclusion-problem.17999/

[END_EDIT]


So, IIUC, if the Autogen showing up on your airfield is NOT the result of your own *an.AGN file(s), something you did- or did not do- is responsible for the Autogen being allowed to "pop through to the top" from *an.AGN files mapped to other default or 3rd party land class layers below ...your own custom photo-real aerial imagery.


GaryGB

 

[GaryGB]

The FS engine does rasterize the autogen data and then display the trees based on this raster. In the FSX.cfg file you can specify the size/resolution of this raster. You can try to increase the resolution and see if that improves the situation.

Hi Arno:

IIUC you are referring to the use of "IMAGE_PIXELS_FOR_AUTOGEN_POLYGONS" parameter values ?

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc526979.aspx#CreatingBuildingFootprints

Note

• Polyline vegetation is rasterized into a sampling bitmap.

The granularity of the rasterization is determined by the following setting in the ESP.cfg file:

[TERRAIN]
IMAGE_PIXELS_FOR_AUTOGEN_POLYGONS=16

The value of this setting is set at the minimum, 16, and can be any value up to 2048. The higher the number the more accurately a curved polygon will be rasterized. The value 16 indicates a rasterization of approximately 80 meters down to approximately 0.5 meter accuracy for the 2048 setting. There is a performance penalty with the time it takes to rasterize a region, and the memory required for the resulting sampling bitmap.


I do recall seeing threads and Blog posts that addressed this issue, but "IIUC", this parameter was only described being utilized for rasterization of Autogen Polygons, and not Autogen Rectangles (aka "Squares").

Did I miss seeing something somewhere in threads- or your Blog- which indicates that IMAGE_PIXELS_FOR_AUTOGEN_POLYGONS is also used when the FS rendering engine processes Autogen Rectangles (aka "Squares"). ?


PS: AFAIK, Ed is using Autogen Rectangles (aka "Squares") in his scenario described above.

GaryGB

 

[arno]

Yes, that's the one I meant. I was too lazy to look up the exact name in the SDK

 

[GaryGB]

Personally, I'm intrigued as to whether Ed's other reported Autogen-related display anomalies may prove to be related to Ed's own work-flow ?

http://www.simforums.com/forums/is3-noautogensuppression_topic56289.html

GaryGB

 

[falcon409]

There is more information here than I can comprehend and so rather than quote anything that has been said. . .it has always been my understanding that a photoreal ground texture compiled/resampled. . .whatever to a bgl overrides the default ground textures as well as any autogen that may have been in that area originally. Are you saying that is incorrect? That, in fact, autogen can "pop-up" through a photoreal texture?

 

[arno]

If you do not have a blend mask in your photo scenery, then it should replace the default textures and their autogen. But in blending zones the behaviour is different.

 

[GaryGB]

Perhaps this discussion thread containing a link to rhumbaflappy's "TransAuto.zip" worked example may merit consideration as well ?

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/autogen-on-transparent-photoscenery.424378/


Another pertinent thread:

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/blend-masks-and-autogen.12686/


Some additional links on this sub-topic:

https://www.google.com/search?q=Aut...=0ahUKEwjrkeSpp8rOAhVILyYKHa55BTkQrQIINCgEMAA


And other threads on the sub-topic of seasonal Autogen anomalies:

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/fsx-trees-with-seasons.141270/

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/random-tree-placement-with-annotator.435069/


[EDITED]

PS: The issue of overlapping Autogen Annotator Vegetation Polys in *an/AGN files and their interaction between scenery layers when processed by the FS rendering engine is discussed in this particularly interesting thread, with input by participants having an in-depth knowledge of the Autogen SDK and FS rendering engine.

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/terrain_max_autogen_trees_per_cell.434273/

http://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/increase-number-of-autogen.20381/#post-141363


[END_EDIT]


Hope this helps !

GaryGB

 

[falcon409]

If you do not have a blend mask in your photo scenery, then it should replace the default textures and their autogen. But in blending zones the behavior is different.

By "blending zones" are you talking about the specific area where the blend has it's effect on the outer edges or any layer with a "_B.tif" extension? There's a big difference there as I see it. If it's just the outer regions we're speaking of then that's one thing, but if the entire area I determine I want captured within the blend is capable of allowing autogen to pop through, that's an entirely different scenario.

 

[GaryGB]

Not wishing to dissuade you from awaiting Arno's further reply to this thread, but while waiting, you may wish to simply make and test a ABP with a single GUID:

{6c0c6528-5cf1-483a-a586-2c905cf2757e} ExcludeAutogen

...as is done in Jim Keir's "Lumberjack" Autogen Exclusion ABP's that extended outwards 3x and 5x the RWY width for default airports.


AFAIK, there is also a reason this ExcludeAutogen attribute is uniformly utilized in all ABP's (regardless of GUID) described in tutorials by Jim Vile and Scruffyduck.


If you do this and have success, perhaps then, we can all celebrate (for a bit of comedy relief) ...with a rousing chorus of "The Lumberjack Song:"

GaryGB

 

[robystar]

Hi,

Sorry for barging in.
Let us recapitulate:
Fact: A non transparent photoreal suppresses all autogen unless you place some new ones with the annotator.
Question: do you maybe have some agn files in the xxxscenery\texture folder that you are making/adapting?
Fact: Putting in a blend mask (even partially transparent) will suppress default autogen as well.
Question: is your blend mask doing its job? Does it have the right 8-bit black and white format? And is this the case? And if so is the blend mask not canceling out the non transparency that you thought your photo real was? In other words, is the white in the blend mask white where it should cancel out everything underneath?
Open for discussion: at what transparency level does the photo real give rise to bleeding through landclass and its autogen?
Simple request from my side:
Get rid of your blend mask (if you have one?) and there should be no autogen present on your (opaque) photoreal unless you have set your scenery in the FS Scenery Library at a lower priority than some other scenery that interferes with yours.

 

[falcon409]

Hi,

Sorry for barging in.
Let us recapitulate:
Fact: A non transparent photoreal suppresses all autogen unless you place some new ones with the annotator.
Question: do you maybe have some agn files in the xxxscenery\texture folder that you are making/adapting?

I have three agn files in the scenery folder - produced via the annotator that cover the current scenery I'm working on

Fact: Putting in a blend mask (even partially transparent) will suppress default autogen as well.
Question: is your blend mask doing its job? Does it have the right 8-bit black and white format? And is this the case? And if so is the blend mask not canceling out the non transparency that you thought your photo real was? In other words, is the white in the blend mask white where it should cancel out everything underneath?

The base layer of the _B.tif file is the photoreal layer reduced to grayscale, second layer is solid black (0,0,0), top layer is the blur, an irregular shaped area of solid white (255,255,255) with a slight Gaussian blur on the outer edge. File is saved as a tif.

Open for discussion: at what transparency level does the photo real give rise to bleeding through landclass and its autogen?
Simple request from my side:
Get rid of your blend mask (if you have one?) and there should be no autogen present on your (opaque) photoreal unless you have set your scenery in the FS Scenery Library at a lower priority than some other scenery that interferes with yours.

To your first question, since I've never had a reason to to that I really have no idea.
To the second question, I'll give that a test when I have time, I've moved on from the scenery that has the autogen problem.
As for the priority level in the Scenery library, I run only full Orbx ground textures and Land Class. I have some of my scenery sitting above all that. . .I have some scenery that sits below all that. . .to be honest, I have never seen a problem with the positioning of either type. Also, Other than turning off every scenery I have loaded, then starting from the bottom and working up, I would have no idea what scenery it is that is interfering with this one project. . .or even if it has anything to do with another scenery. I won't be performing that test.

 

[robystar]

Hi,

I think you misunderstood. You would just have to resample your photoreal once more without the blend mask to find out if that one is to blame or not.

 

[falcon409]

Hi,
I think you misunderstood. You would just have to resample your photoreal once more without the blend mask to find out if that one is to blame or not.

Thanks for the clarification and thanks for taking the time to suggest some possible reasons for the problem. However, the volume of information gathered and subsequently offered in this thread and also one I started on the SimForums far outweighs the problem itself. It's obvious that these sort of anomalies are simply a part of scenery building and finding the reason can be elusive and multilayered and ultimately not something I care to pursue. My sceneries are done basically for my own enjoyment and every so often if there's enough interest on my home forum I release it but only on that forum. When I come upon a glitch from time to time I look for a possible cure, but when the techniques and amount of information needed to track down the problem becomes more involved and time consuming than the scenery itself. . .it's time to move on. This is such a case.

So thanks to you and Arno and GaryGB for your time, but there is too much here to mess with for the sake of some missing trees or trees that appear where they shouldn't. There is always the ability to apply an exclude to knock a few out or vegetation scenery objects to add a few back in. Thanks again.