Posts by crispy136

    Have updated the template with the following enhancements:-

    . Added feature to filter buildings from airport areas automatically. It is no longer necessary to create an exclude for airport areas. This works in most parts of the world.
    . Added feature to remove trees from playing fields. In Australia UK and the USA it is common to have playing fields located in areas designated in OSM as parks. Without this update you end up with trees appearing in playing fields such as cricket pitches, hockey fields, baseball diamonds etc. European countries do not seem to categorise areas with playing fields as parks in OSM, so is not a problem for them. Note - this feature has a slight time penalty of about 2 minutes on level 10 my test area.
    . Corrected comments about the size splitting of houses.
    . Added new plant area for scrub (Australia specific I think)
    . Added new street lighting with traffic lights created by Kenventions.

    Chris, can you tell me which line(s) calls for just plain old residential houses?

    Houses are at line 100 & 101 in the version 5 template

    CreateAF2Building|NOT building ="roof" And FAREARAT>0.7 And FAREA <400|1|1|gable|residential|0
    CreateAF2Building|NOT building ="roof" And FAREARAT>0.7 And FAREA >=400 And FAREA <700|2|1|gable|residential|0

    The following picture shows the region of Titusville exported from OSM and opened in JOSM.

    Thanks for the information Thomas. I'll definitely have a look at this. I can see that this would allow you to easily add missing objects. For me this would perhaps be most suitable to add missing landmarks near airports. Personally I would want to avoid manually adding a lot of objects to the OSM data, just from a time and effort perspective. My preference is to create sufficient detail to enhance the realism of the FS2 with the least possible effort. After all you're only going to fly over it briefly.

    East Center Florida where it land juts out to the East is Cape Canaveral/Kennedy Space Center. That is the area I am working in today. -80 w 29 deg will get you in the neighborhood.

    Hi Ray, Looking at the area in OSM the problem is that there is very little data recorded for buildings, so scenProc can't create much. Unless you use another source your cultivation is not going to get any better. OSM is the only source I am aware of but I know other users have produced more detailed areas where OSM has a lot less detail.


    The gray squares inside the red circles represent buildings in Titusville. Notice there are on very few gray squares. It you use the select tool and click on a building you can see what values are available for that building. Most buildings I clicked on contained the same values as this one, which was virtually nothing. Trees are not a problem as green areas seem to be well documented in this area.


    Compare this with the area in the region I live. It is filled with buildings! The city centre shown in green has nearly every building recorded. The urban areas in red in the red circle are also well detailed, as is the commercial and residential areas around it. Also the buildings themselves are well documented with the type of buildings and the number of levels. This level of detail gives good results with cultivation. Unfortunately this level of detail is not sustained through all of the suburban and industrial areas of my region. Some are like this, some a bit sparser, and some with nothing. But like your area, green areas are well documented in most places.


    98% of the houses are not cultivated.

    I did see comments in other threads that too much cultivation can result in stuff disappearing. Perhaps the area you are selecting in OSM is too large, level 10 is the recommended size. Also are there any houses in OSM for the missing areas? I have found that whole suburbs are just missing in my home city, while in other areas every house is recorded. ScenProc is limited to what is recorded in OSM. Send me details of the OSM area where there is a problem with missing houses and I'll look at the source data to see if something needs tweaking. You can also try using one of the older templates (ver4) that uses the building length to cultivate buildings. I changed it to building area in ver5. Don't forget this will disable any features introduced in ver5 and is just for troubleshooting. The attached file is ver4 but with the SplitGRid and MergeGrid enhancements included.

    Did a little case study myself as I have learned to create Fscloudport airports, photo textures, cultivation and now mesh for Australia. The area is an Island resort in the Whitsunday Islands in north east Australia. Just did a small level 11 sized area.


    Standard FS2 - no development by Ipacs other than low res textures and mesh.


    With basic Fscloudport airport runway


    With detailed Fscloudport airport



    With photo textures - at last something that starts to look real, but the harbour and the shoreline above it are heading uphill


    With mesh - harbour and shoreline above now flat. Compare the hills below with the screen shot above. Note - the island on the far right horizon is outside the mesh area.



    With cultivation - the icing on the cake. Not a lot of detail available in OSM for this area, but enough to add realism with little effort.

    I am wondering if we can direct our cpu allocation to favor ScenPro processing

    .Using the SplitGrid command already allows scenProc to process the multiple grids simultaneously. This is already enabled in my template. I also noticed a low CPU and memory usage with scenProc even when it is working hard, unlike GeoConvert. This is probably something you should ask Arno the creator of scenProc.


    I am missing most of the residential houses in the cultivation here.

    The lines you have indicated are only for large residential buildings, which usually means residential high rise. Further up your screen shot I see that you have created 2364 single level houses and 918 double level houses. So it seems to be working as expected.

    Thanks again to Chris for publishing your reply from Bing.


    I contacted the same chap and have had a very positive response too.

    That's a great result Michael, But don't forget to post screenshots of your full email request and Bing's full response in your "Bing Satellite Imagery" thread for other forum members. Without proof, it is just hearsay.

    One thing we need to work on is large individual trees are being placed in these lakes or sinkholes and this looks rather odd and out of place.

    Hi Ray,


    My next template has additional coding that uses polygons within the source file to exclude objects from areas. So it will no longer be necessary to manually create an exclude for airport areas. The script will identify the airport area, then exclude any buildings it was going to create within that area. I did a quick check around the globe (Australia, USA, UK, South Africa, Germany, Havana) and they all (but only some airports in Havana) use the same logic for airports in OpenStreetMaps. So this change should work for almost everywhere.


    I also used similar logic to solve a tree problem. The problem caused by sporting fields being located within the boundaries of parks, which is common in Australia, USA and the UK. As the script adds trees to parks, the trees were appearing in the middle of baseball diamonds, hockey fields, cricket fields etc. So I used the same logic as used for airport areas to get scenProc to automatically exclude those trees for me, using the areas of the sporting fields as defined by OSM. If you look at the larger image of the screenshot below you'll see the park on the left where the sporting fields are covered with trees. Then with the new coding, the sporting fields are visible in the image at the right while the trees in the rest of the park area are unaffected. The tree density was turned way up to allow me to test the scenario, so the final tree density for parks is much lower and more realistic. Europe doesn't seem to classify areas containing sporting fields as parks so wasn't a problem for them.


    The only downside of this process to exclude trees is that there is a time penalty that increases proportionally with higher tree densities. I have parks set at 0.00025 and get only a 2 minute penalty. However using the same area with parks set to 0.0001, as in the screen shot, the time penalty was 10 minutes. Automatically excluding buildings from airport areas has a negligible time penalty.


    Perhaps we could use a variation of this same coding to automatically exclude your trees from the sinkholes or lakes. It would just depend on how the area containing the trees is recorded in OSM. Send me a screenshot of OSM for an area with this problem and I'll investigate. Just make sure you are in an export screen with an area selected so I can use the coordinates to find the area.



    This topic is all very interesting but all the comments I have seen in relation to Bing usage in various threads are just hearsay. No-one other than myself has actually produced any evidence that shows the details of what was asked and the full response from Bing, including who made the response. I'm not suggesting anyone is making anything up, but unless you know the actual details of the full request, the full response and the respondent's identity, how would you know if the response is relevant? You could say my email screen shots are not real evidence either, but I am too busy creating scenery and cultivation to have time to forge emails.


    I also think it matters who asks Bing the question. A hobbyist wanting to share with other hobbyists for free is different to a software developer wanting to share stuff for free with hobbyists who use the software they sell. The is no profit in the 1st but indirect profit in the 2nd. I think Bing recognises this difference which may explain the differences in responses to myself and IPACS.


    It also matters that your question gets to the right area. As anyone who has ever rung their bank for advice can attest, it who you talk to that matters. If your question only makes it to the customer support area or the junior in the licensing department who started last week, then they are more likely to say no to your request because they are not qualified to answer your question. However I think just by pure luck my request made it to someone who was qualified to answer the question, the Business Development Manager of Bing Licensing. Unless of course he only started last week. :)


    But the best advice is "If in doubt, don't", and do you really want to spend hours uploading your scenery anyway? I think the real solution to scenery sharing are programs like AeroScenery and scenProc, and tutorials and source files that let you get the best out of them easily. Once you have a handle on these you can pump out scenery very quickly, AND pick the level of detail that best suits YOU.

    OK Thanks. I am in the middle of doing a smaller area in Florida right now but, I will try the New Orleans. Do you think the .0001 vs .0025 may be a factor in the long crunch time?

    Yes, increased tree density does increase processing time, but in my testing only from 1 minute to 3 minutes, for a city and suburban area with some forested areas around. But it will be longer for areas with more plants areas. Ver 5 of the template runs a little quicker but pulls in more data than before, so it is swings and roundabouts for processing time.


    It may have something to do with your computer specs perhaps. When you try New Orleans, compare it with my results which was a total running time of 580 seconds and of that 471 seconds was for plants. The New Orleans area seems to have a lot of wetland areas which are a new inclusion in the latest template, and I notice scenProc spends some time on these areas for New Orleans, creating 650,000 wetland plants. Areas designated as wetlands in my neck of the woods are full of Mangrove forests, so I use a high density here. Wetlands in different parts of the world may require a lesser density. As I used the shrub tree type, they are only visible at low altitudes, so you could reduce the density for wetlands without much impact. Wetland areas may be the same with Florida.


    I'll experiment with plant densities and see if I can find a sweet spot for density vs processing time, and include that in a later release. At present the values are set to give the best visual effect.

    Since we are downloading your newest versions, if we add documentation to a given version, it will have to be added again

    Thanks for your comments Dave. Unfortunately any end user added detail will always be lost and replaced with mine after you download a new template. Not sure I could get around that with my limited knowledge. My comments are limited to areas I have learned and tested. Haven't had much to do with lights yet so no comments and they seem to work pretty well without me changing them.


    I usually test my script in Australia (City, suburban & rural), UK (near Heathrow) and US (New Orleans & Hawaii) but I may be missing features that you have found and tested. Perhaps you might like to share the comments and updates you are adding in each time, and I'll see if they could be included in a future release. No promises though as too much detail can be counter productive.


    I had also thought of offering users varying levels of detail so they could either pick high detail (longer processing time) or lower detail (quicker processing time). Combined with my plans for temperate and tropical plants, they then just need to uncomment the lines with the level of detail and zone they require before running scenProc. Similar to what I have done for European houses in the current script.


    I would encourage anyone to share scripts of there own (or just individual lines of code) as mine are not the definitive answer to cultivation, just a reflection of what I have managed to learn and test so far. There are forum members with far greater knowledge and skills than mine.

    That is probably correct - my selected area is most likely too large.

    Some users have reported that cultivation can go missing if the source area is too large and other threads indicate that IPACS use level 10 sized area themselves.

    Its pretty easy to select a level 10 size area using a spreadsheet utility created by Qwerty42 for the FSET process of scenery creation.

    Image tile coordinates


    The screen shots below show how to use this spreadsheet for cultivation source extracts. I used the New Orleans area you were interested in as an example. Why don't you give it a go for New Orleans.


    1. Get the co-ordinates to use in OpenStreetMap. Note - you have to tab off the field after you have entered the values to get the spreadsheet to update the coordinates.



    2. Extract the data in OpenStreetMap, just use 4 decimal places of the 6 available from the spreadsheet.


    I went out for an early lunch, then went shopping and just got home - the green bar is still moving at 3 1/2 + hours so this might be an overnighter edition.

    What size area is in your source file? It may be too big if it is running that long. Some users have reported missing cultivation when the source area is too big. I use a level 10 sized area and use the "Image tile co-ordinates" utility created by Qwerty42 to give me the area for the OpenStreetMap co-ordinates. https://www.dropbox.com/s/zv3c…gridcoords_v1.6.xlsm?dl=1