Posts by Hartman

  • South Norway

    Quote from Thuster

    This can't be part of the poor quality you was talking about?

    For me, one of the challenges is to prioritize the most important and overlook the details. Otherwise, I will never be finished ......:!:

    But, you know ..... When I start, it is almost like a scientist who constantly finds something new when he looks deep into the microscope. ;)

    I spent too much time at Aalsund. But with a little training I just have to overlook some of the bad ortho (especially oceans / fjords and light clouds). Then it gets worse ...... :D

  • South Norway

    I will try to upload some areas from southern Norway. Then we see where it ends. ;)

    The following areas will be selected on the basis of practical reasons such as workload, access to ortho, areas of interest, airports, etc.. The uploaded areas will therefore fluctuate between south, north, east and west.


  • South Norway

    Quote from IZ0JUB

    The only way forward already mentioned above is to make the airports in say 1 or 2 M/PIX resolution and then for the mass area try zooming further out and downloading it in say 4 M/PIX or 9 M/PIX resolution.


    Its all a compromise with this very poor quality satellite imagery.

    Yes, unfortunately, there are many compromises. I want to examine your suggestion - and see how I might be able to combine the different resolutions. But basically I would try 2m/pix all over South Norway (many of us like low and slow).

  • South Norway

    With a reference to what has been said above:

    I am considering uploading South Norway. But unfortunately not in the same quality as the Lofoten-Bodo Area. It will be tooooooooooo much work. As usual, ortho is a "mixed bag". Some areas are great - while other areas are a challenge. I have already done a surface treatment in Photoshop - and fixed the transition between the Norwegian coast and the AFS2 sea (but much work remains).

    Lofoten-Bodo Area = Quality over quantity.

    Southern Norway = Quantity over quality. Those are the harsh realities.

    For me, airports are one of the most important things in a flight simulator (next to aircraft). I just need a place to take off - and land on. :)

    Therefore - if I continue with this project (South Norway) - I prioritize starting with the airport areas - and then replenishing with less important "flying over areas" (the areas between the airport areas).

    Southern Norway is huge - so I can't remove all the clouds - but will try to remove the ugliest ones. The same with the sea areas (the fjords). We must basically just accept ortho as they are (and hope that in the future IPACS will create proper water surfaces). But again - I will try to fix the ugliest areas. But unfortunately, I have to make hard priorities.

    Here are some examples of what I mean we have to accept - and not:

    Yellow arrow = Bad situation accepted.

    Red arrow = Bad situation not accepted. Must be repaired.

    aerofly.com/community/index.php?attachment/23842/

    For my own use - I can accept all the ortho errors as shown by the yellow arrow (not the red arrow). But I don't spend time and resources sharing - if it's not good enough quality for my fellow flight simmers. ;)

    In comparison: Here are a few examples (screen dump) from the upcoming Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020):

    To emphasize: I am considering uploading South Norway. But I'm not going to fix all the ortho errors (water / clouds). The cost / benefit is not realistic in my lifetime. So my fellow flight simmers - based on these preconditions - do you think there is interest in this South Norway project?

  • South Norway

    Thanks for your comments.

    Quote from pgf

    Unfortunately no. There are differences in colours and saturation. so I think you have to use different sources (Bing, Google etc) (timeconsuming) to get a better result. In the future photos of better quality will come.

    Regarding norgeibilder.no:

    Here is a typical example. As you can see, the on-screen ortho is much better than what is downloaded from the same place using AeroScenery.

    Perfect ortho that doesn't need editing:

    Here's what AeroScenery downloads from the same area from "Norge i bilder". It's not the same ortho I see on the screen.

    A tragedy - which kills the work desire - when I know there is better ortho from "Norge i bilder". ;)

    This last ortho is actually useless. So there is no doubt that there are better ortho out there than we can currently download.

    And yes. In Project Lofoten, Bodo Area and Bardufoss - I use a combination of several sources (and color corrects them):

  • South Norway

    Thanks pgf.

    Quote from pgf

    I have used Norge i Bilder as the source of my collection of Norwegian photoscenery, (no clouds) but the quality is certainly mixed (different seasons etc)

    For me - different seasons are not a problem. Because I think it's okay with more than one season. ;)

    The biggest challenge is terrible "ortho-clouds" and poor quality of sea areas (fjords). How do you download ortho from norgeibilder.no?

    When I use AeroScenery to download from norgeibilder.no - it is often poorer quality of ortho than what I can see directly from the website norgeibilder.no. Do you have any good advice?