I'm sure that this issue has no doubt been discussed at great length before and is a constant frustration to all FS2 cultivators, and I'm sorry if I've brought it to the fore once again. Surely IPACS must see how totally counter-productive to community oriented scenery and mod development their thinking is though? If someone with more time and ability is able to automatically generate cultivation and freely share this with the FS2 community, and then someone like myself says "I love what you've done, but there's a tree placed right over my house that I'd like to remove", then I have to learn how to re-generate all of that cultivation and re-do it all with a tiny exclusion polygon, just so that I don't have a tree planted in my roof. This is a complete duplication of effort!?
Surely it is preferable that someone with coding/scripting knowledge should focus on doing what they do best, whereas someone like myself who is better suited to 3D modelling/texturing should be able to do just that and not have to learn to code and script as well, and then spend time repeating a process that someone has already spent their time doing?
I'm preaching to the converted aren't I?
As I told you :
Worry not, I listened 🙂
However the method you suggest will only work if the cultivation .TOC is still readable as text format yes? If I was to use someone else’s cultivation files or generate areas of cultivation and then compile them, but afterwards find something out of place that I didn’t pick up on when I initially checked them before compiling, there is no method to quickly remove or blank out something undesirable after the event. If that is the case then so be it, I guess I’m just trying to understand what is or isn’t possible when developing scenery for FS2.
Scenproc... Ok, been looking at this tonight and I can basically see how it works. However, I'm not sure it can do what I still would like to achieve, which is to exclude the existing automatically generated cultivation radio masts (i.e. multi-floored buildings) and replace them with my own hand placed versions. In other words, not include a .KML file for exclusion during the scenproc script processing, but rather entries in a .TOC file that would exclude an area within an already cultivated area using lat/lon coordinates I specify.
Does that make sense? Am I asking for the impossible by any chance?
Definitely overwhelming and worth sitting down and getting your head around it. Arno has been developing both ScenProc and MCX for many years and added a lot of well-thought features over the time. Fortunately enough, he usually documents his stuff very professionally and manuals are real bibles.
I remember Arno's name from my FS9/FSX days... a real pillar of the flight sim scenery development community!
Well, so far I've managed to get started on editing my airfield .TOC by hand and adding objects from the XREF library, so progress is being made. It's a little unwieldy, but combining it with placing dummy objects using the AFS2 Scenery Editor, I'm getting results. I'll post some images once I have something worth showing.
Thanks all again for helping me get this far
You may use multiple sources in ScenProc actually, it's a very powerful tool.
This is fantastic stuff... and somewhat overwhelming I can see I'll need to sit down and really get my head around all this at some point.
Earlier in this thread Hartman advised you the AFS2 Cultivation/Scenery editor tool, did you try it ?
That's basically what I've started using, yes. I initially downloaded IZ0JUB's cultivation files for the whole UK and removed the ones I didn't want that are outside my area. The remaining ones are still sizeable and editing/adding to them was looking like an impossible task. So I considered starting afresh by adding my own cultivation using the AFS2 Cultivation/Scenery editor, working outwards from my local airfield. But I suppose I've hit two hurdles... 1) being the large number of generic trees/buildings I'll need to place by hand to cover the region and 2) placing specific buildings/objects to better represent their real world counterparts. If I could find a way to exclude IZ0JUB's auto-generated cultivation just from the airfield would be helpful because then I can better place my own manually.
So... I'm sticking with IZ0JUB's overall coverage of cultivation at the moment and have begun looking at placing custom objects on the airfield using AC3D. Then I will look into redoing the overall cultivation myself just for the areas I want by bulk converting OSM data (as I imagine IZ0JUB did), but creating smaller files rather than one big 1.2GB file.
I'd also like to find a way of referencing a different source of building objects as well when placing cultivation for some that better represent those found in the UK.
Thanks folks for the extra information regarding the antennas and that multiple .TOC files are possible. It would seem that the floating trees issue might well have been related to the Vulkan renderer then as they returned to proper placement after switching back to OpenGL. I'll look out for more anomalies, but at least after your help I can proceed with what I'm working on knowing that I'm not doing anything wrong.
These house-towers instead of radio masts unfortunately occur again and again. I saw on a base map that there is written "tower" at the respective positions. I have observed this effect with radio masts and chimneys so far.
Because of other projects I have not dealt with it further so far.
Tschüss, Michael (III)
Thanks Michael for confirming this and that it is not just an error I'm seeing in the sim
Ok, well I think things may not be quite so straightforward...
After thinking this house of numerous floors was originally an anomaly, I think it may actually be what is being used to represent a radio antenna in the sim - was this intentional, or has the wrong object been pulled in?
[Blocked Image: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48631018346_f97f2620e4_h.jpg]
Then I saw this arrangement of floating trees. I thought it might be a Vulkan rendering issue, so switched back to OpenGL and it seemed to fix the issue. However, I am also trying to run my own .TOC to add small additional details to specific areas. Can someone confirm that it is possible (or not) to run more than one .TOC file in an area as long as it named differently, or could my own .TOC be causing possible conflicts?
[Blocked Image: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48631164987_7fa067428e_h.jpg]
Any further thoughts/suggestions are appreciated.
Actually I think this whole thread is likely irrelevant now anyway.
I went back into the sim to try and establish exactly where the anomaly was (I'd paused it at the location) and the towering oversized tree has gone! So, I'm going to assume it was some sort of visual or calculation error when rendering the cultivation
The first thing to look at is, check whether IZ0JUB's TOC files are in binary or text format:
Try opening 1 with notepad, if you get a listing of kabbalistic signs, then the file was compiled in binary format and you cannot edit it
If it's in text format you can easily edit it, you "just" need to find the rogue tree...
That is in fact a good idea I had (wrongly) assumed that they would be compiled in binary format, however you are correct that they are text format. However, opening the file took a while and it's pretty much too slow and unwieldy to sift through as it is 1.2GB in size and scrolling through it was impossible. That aside, finding the *exact* tree would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack I think anyway. It wouldn't really bother me, except that the tree is so tall that I mistook it for a radio mast while flying around in VFR
This is exactly what I’ve started using, but it’ll take me ages to cover the area IZ0JUB has already completed, so I’d rather use his ,TOC/.TSC files and make specific changes. But I don’t think I can edit his files to remove this rogue tree, that’s why I need an exclude/removal technique if possible.
Ah great, thanks for confirming that process. I'll generate some additional lower resolution tiles then further out to sea and paint those in with a generic colour and see what results I get.
I have downloaded and am using one of IZ0JUB's wonderful cultivation files for my southwest UK photo scenery. However I have found an anomaly (a giant vertical tree) and would like to know if it is possible to exclude/hide/remove the object from the original file or create an additional file that would do the same?
Thanks for the reply and explanation Antoine. I also have been painting up to the coastline using the airbrush tool in Photoshop and have no problems with blending the existing photo scenery with the default. However, it is possible that I have not generated enough tiles further out around the coast (i.e. far enough out to sea) that I cannot still see my transitions when flying VFR around the coast. Do you generate additional tiles around your islands that are basically just full of sea to aid in 'losing' the blend into the default IPACS sea colour?
Hi, I hope someone can help me...
I have created some photo scenery of some of the southwest of the UK for Aerofly using Aeroscenery. The photo scenery itself looks fine, but I am having trouble blending the coastline into the generic IPACS 'sea'. I have tried the mask method, but the transparency of the mask appears to only support black/white and not grayscale, so the results were terrible. I have also tried painting a single colour (e.g. RGB 10,20,30 and other values I've seen suggested) but again have had poor results. The problem seems to lie in that the 'sea' surrounding the coastline appears to be a very low res image and not one single colour that allows for a seamless blend when manually painted.
Has anyone here had successful results with trying to blend the UK's coastline seamlessly into the surrounding areas of sea? If so, would you be kind enough to share your method?
without damage modelling simulation is a joke, no question.
I have a question... why?
In the real world, the whole idea is not to crash in your aircraft, or to damage it. If you do damage it (e.g. hit another aircraft while taxiing, land heavily on a strut) then the aircraft is not airworthy and can't be flown. So, why spend time modelling damage for a sim where avoiding any sort of damage is the very purpose of it?? I'd rather the time be spent on correct flight characteristic modelling, and proper instrument and weather simulation.
A screenshot of what you're seeing would be helpful.
Well I just removed the cockpit glass reflections from the C-172 by manually renaming the texture file 'glass_reflection_color.ttx' to 'glass_reflection_color.OLD'. There are no doubt similar files for the other aircraft and each aircraft has other '_reflection' texture files that I'm sure you can play with renaming to get rid of other reflections (panels, gauges etc.).
Just backup or list which files you rename in case you need to put things back as they were. Also, further updates to Aerofly may overwrite/replace your manual changes unless you make a copy of the aircraft folder and place it in your '(hard drive):\Users\(your name)\Documents\Aerofly FS 2\aircraft' folder.
It's worth the wait though