• 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.

Possible Bug

=Hollywood=

=Hollywood=

Messages
1,025
Country
us-florida
Hi Arno,

I think I may have tracked down a bug.

I've got both buildings and vegetation in my source SHP file and when I run this one block through Scenproc I'm getting several AGN tiles that have placed the buildings but the vegetation polygons have disappeared.

I've removed all holes via GIS software and when I did the original test all the vegetation polygons were fine. I've double checked my source data and it seems there may be a bug in the writing of the AGN files?

I've attached a screenshot, you'll see all the white dots which are the AGN buildings, however the blocks of vegetation are missing on the AGN tile.

I've tried flipping the order of processing in the .spc but the result is still the same.

Hence, it appears to be a bug in writing out the AGN file perhaps?

Cheers,
Dean.
 

Attachments

  • buggy.jpg
    buggy.jpg
    120.4 KB · Views: 426
Hi Dean,

As we discussed in the chat already it's most likely caused by small autogen buildings.

But scenproc should filter them out automatically, so I'm happy to hear what size of buildings caused this, so that I can improve the filter.
 
Hi Arno,

As we discussed on chat, it was actually a rendering bug in Autogen Annotator, the vegetation polygons were there in sim, scenproc had done it's job properly :) issue was with the MSFT SDK software. :) No need to improve the filter, works perfectly fine as is :-D
 
The problem is when you would make some adjustments in annotator they would be gone afterwards. So that's why I try to make scenproc so that annotator also shows the autogen correct.
 
Hello!

I too am having this issue. Any update how to to resolve it?
 

Attachments

  • agnissue.png
    agnissue.png
    813 KB · Views: 451
Hi,

No, I haven't been able to reproduce it. And Dean reported it's fine in FS.

Could it be related to the complexity of the data you use?
 
Hi,

Yes, the data is detected features from scenproc, so there are quite a lot of buildings and trees in each cell. As Dean reported, it is fine in FS. The only problem is if I open the bgl file in the autogen annotator and edit it, it saves the file with the missing data. Not good. Is there any way to fix this or go around it? Thanks!
 
I would first have to understand what's wrong before I can fix it. It might also be we have hit some Annotator limitation.
 
Do you see a pattern in which objects are missing? Small ones or complex ones or ...
 
The only pattern that I notice is that the vegetation is what is not displayed. The buildings are always shown in the annotator, it is just the frequent, yet random vegetation that fails to be shown. Here is a close up screenshot.
 

Attachments

  • agn1.png
    agn1.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 433
But do you feel that the tiles missing are more complex than those that show? More polygons for example or more vertices per polygon?
 
The missing areas really do not seem to have any more or less complexity than other areas without the problem. Building sizes, shapes, and numerical amounts seems to be fairly close. That being said, that is simply from a close visual inspection via the annotator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top