• 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.

Comparing the 3 ways to texture the ground...

Messages
86
Country
canada
There are pro's and cons for every method of ground texturing.

Firstly I put all three options side by side (for what it's worth this is just a flat plane textured in Substance).

Screenshot_4.jpg


Right off the bat we can see how awesome the Scenery object renders in the game's engine. If only the other 2 where this awesome. Unfortunately, unless you are completely flat on your apron area (with a polygon that's terraforming flat) this is useless (especially when far away do to flickering). Runways that have the slightest of slopes will just eat through it.

The other 2 options are fast and easily editable however no matter what you do, you will always ALWAYS see some sort of default normal map when close up and it just doesn't do justice. You lose a ton of beautiful detail. See close ups...

Close up of Apron Element with Albedo and Manual Comps done in PS:

Screenshot_5.jpg



Close up of Projected Mesh with Albedo, O/M/R + Normals

Screenshot_6.jpg


Scenery Element with O/M/R + Normals

Screenshot_7.jpg


Given this comparison I think its worth the flattening of the tarmac, dropping down nice custom scenery element (if its a big tarmac you will have to unwrap with multiple texture sets so you stay nice and HQ). Super super time consuming but the results may be worth it. The other 2 however are great for sloped runways. This is how each react when terraformed:

Screenshot_8.jpg


Has anyone maybe figured out the holy grail and somehow been able to remove that bumpy normal map when close up to your apron or projected mesh? I still have not decided FULLY on a workflow given all these variables.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_6.jpg
    Screenshot_6.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 145
Last edited:
The default normal map is used for interactions with the rain (at least). I am sure you've noticed that with scenery objects you do not have any wet effects on them when it's raining. Remove the normal map and a ton of users will whine that their custom ground does not get wet. A better way out would be to "teach" the sim to interact with all normal maps, but that's probably a long development story to be wrtitten by Asobo...
 
There are pro's and cons for every method of ground texturing.

Firstly I put all three options side by side (for what it's worth this is just a flat plane textured in Substance).

View attachment 69949

Right off the bat we can see how awesome the Scenery object renders in the game's engine. If only the other 2 where this awesome. Unfortunately, unless you are completely flat on your apron area (with a polygon that's terraforming flat) this is useless (especially when far away do to flickering). Runways that have the slightest of slopes will just eat through it.

The other 2 options are fast and easily editable however no matter what you do, you will always ALWAYS see some sort of default normal map when close up and it just doesn't do justice. You lose a ton of beautiful detail. See close ups...

Close up of Apron Element with Albedo and Manual Comps done in PS:

View attachment 69950


Close up of Projected Mesh with Albedo, O/M/R + Normals

View attachment 69952

Scenery Element with O/M/R + Normals

View attachment 69953

Given this comparison I think its worth the flattening of the tarmac, dropping down nice custom scenery element (if its a big tarmac you will have to unwrap with multiple texture sets so you stay nice and HQ). Super super time consuming but the results may be worth it. The other 2 however are great for sloped runways. This is how each react when terraformed:

View attachment 69954

Has anyone maybe figured out the holy grail and somehow been able to remove that bumpy normal map when close up to your apron or projected mesh? I still have not decided FULLY on a workflow given all these variables.
Thank you for this post. To have projected meshes retain the quality of a scenery object would be my biggest wish.

What did you settle on? I've decided to go with projected meshes, just trying to establish a good workflow.
 
I've tried all 3. With cons and pros.

I've done small objects with a slight elevation on the Z axis for better quality. For example, a drain grate. Then I use the vector placement feature to repeat them "seamlessly".

When I create textures y export the custom material COMP to use in the sim and another COMP to use in blender.

One advantage of aprons is the falloff feature and the ability to colorize the texture. Transparency can also be applied this way.

When I create a projected mesh, changing the color/opacity properties of the material in blender, has no effect on the PMs. I would have to create another albedo PNG of the same texture just to change the color/transparency, then create another material in blender with the modified image.

As far as resolution PMs and Aprons have the same quality. To capture the screenshots of my products I bump the terrain LOD to 400 for the "best' quality.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top