Resolution question using FSET scenery

  • With everything else being equal, which would provide the highest resolution scenery for generally low and slow flying? Say, the Cessna 172 at 2500 feet.


    1m download level processed at level 13

    or

    2m download level processed at level 14


    Is there any specific advantages or disadvantages for either case? :/

    Regards,

    Ray

  • I'm still experimenting but using 1 m download / level 14 around airports at present, too.


    Not sure if the maker of GeoConvert Helper is still around here. I like the Helper very much, but the general recommendation within the tool to make scenery al levels 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 is dangerous, at least for the beginner. I learned that the hard way when I tried making a large area using all of these resolutions, which just isn't viable (and actually isn't required either).


    Kind regards, Michael

  • I use 1M at Level 14 around cities and airports, it look pretty good. I’ve done large areas but, takes a long time.


    Todd

    I'm still experimenting but using 1 m download / level 14 around airports at present, too.


    Not sure if the maker of GeoConvert Helper is still around here. I like the Helper very much, but the general recommendation within the tool to make scenery al levels 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 is dangerous, at least for the beginner. I learned that the hard way when I tried making a large area using all of these resolutions, which just isn't viable (and actually isn't required either).


    Kind regards, Michael

    I’m curious about what level you guys are using for the larger areas between airports. For instance, what other levels are used around an airport where you only use 1m level 14? What is used between two airports that have level 14?


    Regards,

    Ray

  • For the more distant environment of an airport or city I use 2 m / Geocovert level 12+13 at present, which I find is sufficent but can't be used for, say, a whole country. This way you can usually cover a larger airport and the city to which it belongs.


    I'm doing more extended areas using FSET 5 / Geoconvert level 11, but this is not really good for VFR. Still better than the default pixel soup though.


    However, I'd acknowledge good alternatives as well.


    Kind regards, Michael

  • Thanks guys.


    I guess I am going to have to run some tests to compare the criteria in the OP.


    Regards,

    Ray

  • This is from the wiki and based on my own tests it's a good recommendation to follow. I usually download very large regions with download resolution of 3 or 4, and convert that from levels 9 to 11. Then I refine smaller areas with download resolution of 1,0, or -1 (depending on how big it is and good I want it to look at close distances) and convert those from levels 12 thru 14 or 15. With most of the publicly available ortho images, you really hit diminishing returns if you go all the way to level 15, though.

  • This is from the wiki and based on my own tests it's a good recommendation to follow. I usually download very large regions with download resolution of 3 or 4, and convert that from levels 9 to 11. Then I refine smaller areas with download resolution of 1,0, or -1 (depending on how big it is and good I want it to look at close distances) and convert those from levels 12 thru 14 or 15. With most of the publicly available ortho images, you really hit diminishing returns if you go all the way to level 15, though.

    Yes, that's where I started, too. Unfortunately, I found orthophotos are not always available for download at all resolution levels.


    Kind regards, Michael

  • Yes, that's where I started, too. Unfortunately, I found orthophotos are not always available for download at all resolution levels.


    Kind regards, Michael

    Your statement made me realize that something with that table should probably be clarified that may be confusing to new geoconverters:

    You can either use the recommended download resolution, or any finer download resolution (meaning a lower number), with each line in that table. In other words, it would perfectly fine to use a -1 download resolution with every geoconvert level from level 9 to level 15... but I doubt anyone would actually do this because that would be a HUGE download.

    The reason for having it broken down as the table does it is just to be efficient with your scenery downloads vs. the size of the area you're covering.

    TL;DR: it's fine to use a better (lower number) download resolution than what it says for each line in the table. Just avoid using a coarser (higher number) download resolution, because then you will start to see visual quality degrade.

  • I have settled on a 2m download for my larger areas with 15 - 18 areas per download. I have been processing these at levels 9 - 14.


    I am using d/l 1 for areas around airports and clusters of small towns and airports. These are also processed at 9 - 14. Occasionally, I use d/l 0 at 9 - 14 for my sharpest or best resolution.


    I still use either d/l 3 or 4 for really large areas to see what the areas looks like or just for flyovers. These are processed at 9 - 12.


    Google is somewhat unpredictable when coastlines, small Islands, bays, and harbors are present. The scenery is very different between d/l levels. I have found several cases where d/l 1 is cleaner and better than d/l 0, especially if I have to edit the water, cloud cover or rivers.


    Regards,

    Ray

  • You can either use the recommended download resolution, or any finer download resolution (meaning a lower number), with each line in that table. In other words, it would perfectly fine to use a -1 download resolution with every geoconvert level from level 9 to level 15... but I doubt anyone would actually do this because that would be a HUGE download.

    At least I understand this. But as you say, I would need a Server Array if I want to download the whole of Germany at level -1.:D


    The table is a good guideline indeed.


    Kind regards, Michael

  • Hi,

    Germany Level -1 ?

    For what ?

    That exploded your Disk space....;)

    For VFR is enough from 9 to 11 Level with Resolution 4

    Airport Ground is enough for Level 13 and Resolution 0.


    The Server where the tiles in FSET comes not so good for higher Resolution at Airports.

    Many Airports at Resolution 0 are pixeled, and you must go to Google Earth and repainted the High Resolution from FSET with the correct

    Picture from Google earth.

    And it was very ticky for repaint the tiles...?( when the airport has more tiles in Resolution 0.

    Example: EDDF or Eindhoven....


    Regards Uli

  • Hi Uli, you actually can get the same satellite imagery in FSET as Google Earth (unless you're referring to the 3D modeled city imagery in Google Earth, which doesn't come from their satellite imagery servers). I don't think I'm allowed to post the .ini file info here unfortunately, but it's just a matter of having the latest Google server number in the FSET ini file. I think the latest version changed again a month or two ago. You can fish it out with the developer pane in Chrome if you know how to use that.

  • Hi,

    Germany Level -1 ?

    For what ?

    That exploded your Disk space....;)

    I didn't do that, of course - for what indeed? I just explored the order of magnitude to see what it's like.


    Kind regards, Michael

  • Ok Google...

    Thats allso... Picture must over working .... Google Text on Ground.;(


    Pmb...;)

    You do not have to do this, nevertheless, at all... For flight over ground about reason level reaches 9-11.

    One makes only the points of interest, nevertheless, only with 13-14.

    This is a month job with-1 for completely Germany.=O



    Regards

    ULI

  • Ok Google...

    Thats allso... Picture must over working .... Google Text on Ground.

    This is true, but after running it through geoconvert you really can't see it in AeroFly (this is in VR, not sure if it's more visible in 2D). I think I've only noticed a visible watermark two or three times in all the many areas I've converted.