Jump to content

MegaSceneryEarth 2.0 England and Wales


Recommended Posts

Does anyone have any info on where this product is up to or even if it has been abandoned? :s

It was supposed to be imminent about 6 months ago and seems to have completely dropped off the radar :(

Cheers K

Is the UK in the pipeline do you know Dean? I have Gen X but would definitely consider a megascenery replacement. Not too interested in Americas and Belgium though unfortunately - my main course of flights are within UK airspace and Ireland.

Cheers

Jim

Jim,

Yes we have a UK and Wales package coming very soon. I have test flown some of it, and I can tell you, for the most part, the imagery is really good. There are a few bugs relating to photoscenery (that are not new - i.e. some watermasking and colour issues) in the source imagery, but for the most part, this will be a big improvement in resolution and visual quality over existing photoscenery for England/Wales.

Here's an exclusive just for Mutleys forums - the first MSE England/Wales screenshot to be release anywhere! No release date on this as yet, but likley to be weeks rather than several months!

MSE-England1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with England and Wales was a combo of source imagery inconsistency (difficult or impossible to fix unless better source data becomes available), although this was not really a major problem. The issue was the watermasking in some parts of the English and Welsh coasts, although again, these may be difficult to fix as the underlying default FSX scenery is way off in some locations. I'll see if I can get an update of where the developer is at in regard to England and Wales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris,

 

I'm not the developer, but my understanding is that when areas are watermasked with transparency, the default scenery underneath, which is not as accurately placed or as well defined as photoreal data, shows through the photoreal textures. This occurs mostly all the time around coastlines and water bodies. It could be fixed if you hand trace and check every square inch of scenery, but on the scales of MSE, this is extremely time consuming and fifficult to do. So much so that it would likely quadruple development time and costs which would have to be recovered in much higher prices for the products, something which is not viable. Hence, this is the tradeoff that is being made in this case.

 

(I think I have the explanation right - from a non-dev point of view anyway).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Creating correct watermasking is possible simply by drawing a Kml file in google earth, converting into a shp file and using that in SBX to create correct vector water - I did it for the coastlines of my Jersey project..

See http://www.flightsimscenery.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/watermask-in-progress.html?m=1

Obviously the trade off here is accuracy v development time. It took me about a solid day of clicking in Google Earth to do the entire Jersey coast but I did try to do every last rock! Depending on how many places there are errors (ie how many QMID11 grids have to have their masks updates) a group of people should be able to create some halfway decent water masks in reasonable time? :)

Cheers K

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dean i have run into the same issue your describing

there is a very simple solution for it

 

don’t work off correcting the coastline in small areas,

exclude all default coastline poly and redraw all of it

you don’t really need to trace the line by hand

its already been done for you

 

find your country administrative boundaries polygon file, and convert it to usable format

 

if you look at my recent pic i posted for NE British-Isles

you will notice that i used blend and water masks for the entire project

this is done to save space in my case; same methodology can be used to help your issue

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure i understand you question there

 

where do you mean from please?

 

the accuracy depands on the data you were provided

in most cases is pretty accurate provided youre useing a recent file

 

the problem with coast lines they are never static from one image set to another

a poly line made for one image set; may not fit perfectly on another

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin; you’re better off importing an existing poly file for your coastline

than visually verify it against your imagery set,

 

repairing small section in an existing polyline will save you days if not weeks; than creating it from scratch.

 

one could also use buffers to simplify bulk processing and skip visual verification all together

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...