Board index FlightGear Development New features

Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Discussion and requests for new features. Please note that FlightGear developers are volunteers and may or may not be able to consider these requests.

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby TribalBob » Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:11 am

abassign wrote in Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:30 pm:
TribalBob wrote in Fri Aug 31, 2018 6:29 pm:I want respect, so i treat others with respect until they lose it which you chose to do by giving me a rude "code it yourself" ...


@TribalBob
hello, this forum, in the development part, is now the Thorsten (called the "Painter") private property and some of his affectionate squire. As you may have noticed the number of interventions in recent months are falling considerably, this because for every new idea, the painter (so named by his squire named Mr. wkitty42 some time ago) ... he says that it is not possible to do it, that he does not agree and you must not do! One must do only what the painter says to do, any other idea is rejected. It seems that the day of the painter has gone only entirely to respond, always saying NIET! With this way of doing it is pushing away all those who want to do something new. So I suggest you open a server on Discord to deepen this very interesting topic. Many pilots want to do VFR flight (Whoever pilots our G91-R1B can do it only in VFR as it is a plane that flew between 3000-20000 ft). So I would also like to see Italy in a photo-realistic format as I can do from YEARS with X-Plane. This is now a forum almost completely useless, until the "painter" will respond to all the things that are written, as his answers have virtually no value, do not allow to give useful information, they can allow to build the base of a discussion that may develop something new over time.

Now I wait for the painter to respond to my post with some of his utterance always vulgar and full of hatred :lol:

The OpenSceneGraph is the graphic engine, and this engine can implement photorealistic functionality. Unfortunately, the "Painter" has too messed up on the canvas and his dull colors have covered the capabilities of OSG. Therefore, often certain things can not be done because the additions of the "Painter" are not compatible. The best thing I think is to work using only the OSG engine without introducing objects that OSG does not handle. At this point the thing should be easy enough to accomplish.
If you now hear the pains :shock: of the painter and his squires ... dear friend do not worry! let this place sat and open a server on Discord that can handle this topic.

https://discordapp.com/channels/269552151997448197/269552151997448197


LOL, joined!
TribalBob
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:58 am

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby Thorsten » Sat Sep 01, 2018 5:30 am

As you may have noticed the number of interventions in recent months are falling considerably, this because for every new idea, the painter (so named by his squire named Mr. wkitty42 some time ago) ... he says that it is not possible to do it, that he does not agree and you must not do!


You're flattering me - but vastly overestimating my influence.

The reality of the situation is more that I happen to have a reasonably good picture of what the interests of other developers are and what is technically possible - so usually I'm just the messenger telling you that things won't work out and it's that nasty thing called 'reality' that really prevents things from happening.

Consider - if I would really block all developments here, OpenSource still allows anyone anywhere else (including you) to do whatever modifications you want elsewhere. So there ought to be that repository where the people do all things I'm supposedly preventing here, and there ought to be that terrific 'other' FG version.

Never seen it though...

Usually it doesn't happen because it really can't be done or it really is a bad idea, and that's why you don't find any other to do it for you - and if you try it yourself, you notice the down-sides quickly (most ideas look a lot better before you actually type code...)

I know it's easier to blame the messenger... but you should be old enough by now to resist the temptation.

Anyway - you're doing great work, and I'm happy to support your suggestions where I see the case (and have done that in the past) - if you can't live with the fact that I don't always see things your way, then so be it.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby wkitty42 » Sat Sep 01, 2018 8:39 am

abassign wrote in Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:30 pm:the painter (so named by his squire named Mr. wkitty42 some time ago)

of course you have proof of this, right? otherwise you make libelous statements.
Thorsten and i do not talk in private. we have never met in person. all of our conversations are public knowledge. where do you get off calling me his squire? i'm just another volunteer here offering assistance when and where i can... i learn by helping others learn... you could do the same instead of spreading libel and slander...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 4898
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby FlugHund » Sat Sep 01, 2018 9:42 am

User avatar
FlugHund
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 3:27 pm
Callsign: D-HUND
IRC name: D-HUND / debdog
Version: next
OS: Devuan

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby Thorsten » Sat Sep 01, 2018 10:07 am

Yeah, do you folks know what an analogy is? It says that 'thing A is in a certain way comparable to thing B', not 'thing A should be called thing B'. It's not rocket science to make that distinction.

So no, he didn't say it there.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10099
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby portreekid » Wed Sep 05, 2018 1:12 pm

I'd be also interested in Photo realistic scenery. When will you make it happen TribalBob?
portreekid
 
Posts: 314
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 3:36 pm
Location: Dresden
Version: 3.0
OS: Windows 7

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby wkitty42 » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:12 pm

apparently he's working on it with the BTG SHP and blender stuff... at least from what i seem to read on another topic or two... i, too, would be interested to see what he comes up with...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 4898
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby Hooray » Tue Oct 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Just for the record, over the course of the last couple of months, Icecode GL has been working on a property-configurable rendering subsystem that is using Canvas concepts to expose the rendering pipeline to XML/property space.

Which is to say that the renderer -which is currently by and large hard-coded- will become increasingly configurable, so that even experimental renderering strategies can be tinkered with, without having to touch any C++/OSG or OpenGL code, and without having to rebuild fgfs.

This is largely based on lessons learnt from the way the Canvas system works, and on ideas originally brought forward by FredB (Rembrandt), Tim (effects, camera group etc) and Mathias (original OSG port), in response to a set of "new-camera" patches shared by Zan back in 2012, that would expose the setup of the rendering pipeline to XML space.

Icecode has shared his progress on the forum and the devel list, and has also been updating the wiki accordingly - he's hoping to get this discussed, reviewed and integrated/merged over the course of the next few months, but he could certainly use some helping hands, especially people experienced with C++/OSG coding.

In laymans terms, this is "only" infrastructure obviously - i.e. it has nothing to do with the implementation of concrete features that many people may want, but the situation is analogous to how glass cockpit aircraft were underrepresented in FlightGear prior to the creation/addition of the Canvas system in 2012, and as we all know, things have massively changed since then.

Thus, if you are interested in seeing new rendering features ("eye candy") appear in FlightGear, please do spread the word, so that people are made aware of this work. This is particularly important, because we have certain systems that are mutually exclusive (think Rembrandt vs. ALS), and some features cannot be worked on by non-C++ developers unless the rendering pipeline is accordingly exposed to fgdata space, but also because there is tons of legacy C++/OpenGL code that hasn't been touched (maintained!) in over a decade.

In other words, Icecode's work could be considered the foundation and technology-enabler for new rendering features without core development having to be the bottleneck, just like Andy's scripting language Nasal has massively enabled FlightGear scripting, and just like Tim's XML-configurable effects framework has facilitated the development of eye candy features by non-C++ devs, and just like Tom's Canvas system allows people to create complex glass cockpit-style avionics without having to know C++, OpenGL, OSG or any of the other fancy acronyms that are usually associated with such work.

As a matter of fact, if/when this system (called "compositor") is adopted by FlightGear, it would even become possible to tinker with additional/alternate LOD and terrain/scenery schemes - including, but not limited to osgEarth specifically - e.g. referring to bugman's idea of "reaching for the stars", aka supporting other planets.

To sum things up, if you've been hoping to support mirrors or tail-cameras on your aircraft, this is the feature that you need. :D

http://wiki.flightgear.org/Compositor
Image
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11267
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Request: User-Friendly Photoscenery Support

Postby daweed » Fri Nov 02, 2018 12:43 pm

TribalBob wrote in Fri Aug 31, 2018 6:29 pm:I want respect, so i treat others with respect until they lose it which you chose to do by giving me a rude "code it yourself" response on your VERY FIRST interaction with me.


TribalBob wrote in Fri Aug 31, 2018 2:51 pm:There is literally ONE regular ATC who is able to work for two hours at a time at ONE airport on the days that he's able to do it (God bless him).


Yet this is a total lack of respect, for myself [LFLL] and the other controller [LFMN] who are "Regularly" in session on weekends. Look at http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/index.php, sessions are announced there. We may not be the traffic of Jomo, but we are all available every week end and sometimes even on weekdays, except special event [the family above all]. LFPO is also regularly under control even if the session is not announced on the web portal
Linux Mint 18.3
AMD FX 4300 Quad-Core Black Edition|20 Go RAMGeForce GTX 750 Ti
FG Interface
Lyon Saint Exupery Scenery
daweed
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 10:45 am
Location: LFKP LFLL
Callsign: daweed
OS: Windows 10 Familly

Previous

Return to New features

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests