stiletto2

I see the same thing with ORBX EGHR Payware active. That scene is completely different without the payware active....and trees are then in place. I assume it is the way the payware was intended to look. Rod

Hi Larry, Thanks for all of your great work including this newest Pacific Northwest Ferries add on. I am sure it will be superb just as it looks in the great pictures by Iain! Rod

To add ".off"to the end of a file, you simply rename the file and add ."off" at the end of the file name. The advantage of just adding ."off" at the end of the file name is that you have disabled the file but it is still there in its entirety and can be enabled later by simply renaming it and removing the ".off" from the end of the file name. Rod

Hi Dawid, Though I fly using P3Dv4, I agree with you that those bleached out areas do seem odd. So, I wondered, are you displaying the Orbx ortho image or some other ortho image which could happen in X-plane if you had another ortho of the same area active somewhere. Since I know that the Orbx TEGBS ortho images in the P3Dv4 version match (aside from lighting) the Orbx TEGBS ortho images in X-Plane, I matched my image in P3Dv4 with the above image that you posted as a bad coloring example. Please see my image below. Though clearly the two images are both correct for this Bosham area, the coloring on your image is totally different from the coloring on my image. They do not match. I am thinking that you could be displaying an image from a non-Orbx ortho file. What do you think? Rod

Can't wait for this one! Rod

That is great! Maybe you can put a few people with suitcases in that area too! It looks pretty dead other than the arrival and departure of the trams. Rod

There is somewhat of a workaround that works for me. When flying outside of the frozen lake months, set the SAK Control Panel "Frozen lakes and river" option to "Open water in Winter". The errant patches of water near lakes and rivers should be eliminated. Once the winter months come, change the setting back. Rod

Here is where to look: Topic: Preview Screenshots and Videos Thread: TrueEarth Florida HD - Miami Cityscape Video Post number 11. Rod

That sounds great, Greg! Thanks for the quick update. Rod

Just a quick note to Sascha and his team.... Thanks so much for SP1 in a timely manner with correcitons for all three parts of TEGB. You even got the Tamar bridge realignment done! I am looking forward to all the future work your team will be doing on the XP TrueEarth ports in the future! Good job! Rod

Nice video, Robert! Rod

Fingers crossed.....! Rod

Yes, I agree with that. Thanks for your help in getting the issue on the list of things to fix! Rod

Since I am a scenery developer who has experience placing people, chairs, umbrellas and other objects etc. on terrain to create scenery, I will try to explain what my assessment might be of the practicality of implementing your suggestion. Though I do development in P3Dv4, I believe that the principle challenges I am about to outline would generally hold true for XP11 as well as P3D. Let me start by saying that the drag on a sim rendering engine is very different when drawing something like ortho scenery (e.g.sand on a beach) vs. drawing a 3D object (e.g. a person or a beach chair). The ortho image is not 3D but instead, is just a 2D picture draped over the mesh based elevations. On the other hand, a 3D object is created by drawing many points that connect lines that create polys that are then shaded/colored and so on. When you put an object on the beach it sits on the sand (does not replace it). And, more importantly, all those points/polys for each object become the main drain on a sim rendering engine. Bottom line, every object added means that the many polys that make up that object have to be drawn by the rendering engine. A single low detail 3d person could have hundreds of polys. Let's say in 200 feet of beach you might want an average of 10 objects each (several people, a few chairs, volleyball net, beach towels etc,) with a 100 polys per object (and that is probably an unrealistically low number of polys). That generates 1000 polys per 200 feet of beach. P3D usually renders objects and/or feels the impact of objects up to a 30 mile radius circle from the user's location. In this case, we will look at the 60 miles of Florida's 663 miles of beaches that fall within that 30 mile radius at a given moment. So we are talking about 316,800 feet of beach (60 miles X 5,280 feet per mile) to be possibly rendered at any one time. So the average number of polys that may very well need to be drawn or readied to be drawn to cover these little beach objects is about 1.5 million polys at any one moment. So, my first assessment is that It is a virtual certainty that an extra 1.5 million polys being rendered as one flies along the Florida coast woud impact frames per second regardless of what system someone is using. However, there are additional issues besides the frame rate impact to be considered. There would be significant developer hours required to create a few hundred unique objects so things would not look too repetitive as well as the hours to hand place about 175,000 objects along those 663 miles of beaches. Object Flow would also have to be brought in to play so that the beaches are deserted at night and maybe a bit sparse in the mornings and late afternoons. Bottom line, when it is suggested that beach objects be added to Florida's beaches since they are never deserted during the day, it sounds simple when you think of the several hundred feet of beach one might see out there resort hotel window. However, as a scenery developer, I would not hesitate to say that it would be a big deal to implement that type of improvement when applied to the entire State of Florida. Rod

Hi Nick, The Tamar Rail Bridge model object has not changed so the model has not been modified. However, its placement in the scenery is what is incorrect. It needs to be lowered and turned counter clockwise a bit. Rod