Board index FlightGear Development Scenery

Next-generation scenery generating?

Questions and discussion about enhancing and populating the FlightGear world.

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby wkitty42 » Sat Oct 05, 2019 1:08 am

helijah wrote in Fri Oct 04, 2019 10:23 pm:Only the person who feels targeted answered.

you're wrong about that as i certainly responded to one (now two) of your posts...
"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: 6661
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 20.04

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby Thorsten » Sat Oct 05, 2019 5:29 am

And since when is this a reconsideration of the developers' work...... Only the person who feels targeted answered. And that's absolutely not surprising.


Ah, this would be more credible if you hadn't used plural in your initial assertion. As for the others - James (who has in actual reality been responsible for the OSG Earth patch review) isn't around - by his own words he doesn't like visiting the forum to avoid conversations with people who think they have the right to demand that certain things are done as they want.

I just took the liberty to answer because I don't like trolls getting their say. And a flat-out assertion that ego is the primary motivation for James to not work on the OSGEarth thingy is no more than trolling.

and everything else and in the same principle you distort the words to justify your personal choices.


You're still not getting it - I don't have to justify my personal choices to you. I am not accountable to you in any way, a simple I am not interested is enough. There's plainly no need to justify more than that.

Let's make a gedankenexperiment. You created plenty of aircraft - which pretty much all have incomplete 3d cockpits and unrealistic flight dynamics. You can dig out lots of threads where other people express that they'd be interested in complete 3d models and realistic flight dynamics.

Yet somehow the same interest by the user community that should prompt me or James to work on OSGEarth should at the same time not prompt you to work on FDMs and complete cockpits. Why would that be I wonder? Likely because you are not interested in these things - you are interested in churning out 3d meshes, so that is what you do.

Which is okay - but then it's also okay if others make the same choice and work only on what they are interested in.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11748
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby GinGin » Sat Oct 05, 2019 5:42 am

Hey Helijah.

What was the french magazine you were speaking about ?

Having read the entire thread with an external eye, I don’t see anyone blaming your work or wanted to block the osg thing ( which seems pretty interesting ).

Some people just said they don’t want to work on it because they don’t believe in it and fair enough , no?

If one day some dev decide to continue the development of osg earth and photo realistic process , It will be taken into consideration , like any other projects .
GinGin
 
Posts: 1129
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:41 am
Location: Paris
Callsign: Gingin

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby helijah » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:05 pm

Thorsten wrote in Sat Oct 05, 2019 5:29 am:Let's make a gedankenexperiment. You created plenty of aircraft - which pretty much all have incomplete 3d cockpits and unrealistic flight dynamics. You can dig out lots of threads where other people express that they'd be interested in complete 3d models and realistic flight dynamics.


AAAHHHH the good old troll, classic and quite wrong. Indeed, it happens that my cockpits are quite simple because I don't always find the necessary information to improve them. But my models are simply designed the coordinated files and all can improve them.

A26 Invader, DR 400, DC 3, Mirage 2000, B25, Yak 18T etc... are among the most finished aircraft in FlightGear.

As I have already explained, I offer organized models that are easy to improve, and when I meet a real pilot, he helps me to improve them.
At least they don't land on the water!

As you point out, we are not here to obey constraints. So why would you allow yourself to force someone to create finished planes!

I would just like to point out that OSGEareth was proposed 6 years ago and rejected as it was explained at the time and that it continues to do so. It's sad.
Some planes (and other) for FlightGear
http://helijah.free.fr
and
http://embaranger.free.fr
User avatar
helijah
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Chartres (France)
Callsign: helijah
IRC name: helijah
Version: GIT
OS: GNU/Linux

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby Thorsten » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:15 pm

But my models are simply designed the coordinated files and all can improve them.


And FG is OpenSource and everyone who wants to implement OSGEarth can do that.

So why would you allow yourself to force someone to create finished planes!


So why would you allow yourself to force someone to work on OSGEarth in FG?

I would just like to point out that OSGEareth was proposed 6 years ago and rejected as it was explained at the time and that it continues to do so.


Edward has explained that to you - it was not 'rejected' as in 'we don't want it', it was reviewed and returned with a couple of things that should be changed in the patch, the author agreed to do these changes - but never re-submitted.

That's all there is to it - a far cry from 'developers egos being in the way', wouldn't you agree?
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11748
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby helijah » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:15 pm

GinGin wrote in Sat Oct 05, 2019 5:42 am:Hey Helijah.

What was the french magazine you were speaking about ?


MICRO SIMulateur. https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=18169&hilit=micro+sim&start=30#p170345

Image

Image
Image
Image
Image

There were some new pages recently (early 2019) on the new generation FlightGear but I didn't take the time to scan the pages. I need to find the magazine:)

Regards. Emmanuel
Some planes (and other) for FlightGear
http://helijah.free.fr
and
http://embaranger.free.fr
User avatar
helijah
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Chartres (France)
Callsign: helijah
IRC name: helijah
Version: GIT
OS: GNU/Linux

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby helijah » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:22 pm

Thorsten wrote in Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:15 pm:And FG is OpenSource and everyone who wants to implement OSGEarth can do that.


Simply because to date, and this is normal, there is a group of main developers who accept or reject additions according to their own criteria and not the general criteria.

I created my own planes in my corner. You are not the creator of Flightgear.
My planes are my creations. And when someone asks me for improvements, I make them without any problem. And if someone brings his or her own, I accept them with ever-present pleasure.
Some planes (and other) for FlightGear
http://helijah.free.fr
and
http://embaranger.free.fr
User avatar
helijah
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Chartres (France)
Callsign: helijah
IRC name: helijah
Version: GIT
OS: GNU/Linux

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby Thorsten » Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:46 pm

Simply because to date, and this is normal, there is a group of main developers who accept or reject additions according to their own criteria and not the general criteria.


Yes - if you don't want FG to run at 1 frame per minute, code that's accepted needs to be efficient. If you want your planes to run in FG for the future, breakage needs to be avoided, backward compatibility ensured, future development paths need to be kept open.

Developers review submissions on technical merits, and you'd be very sorry by now if that would not happen because the general public knows next to nothing about e.g. code efficiency.

But - OpenSource is GPL licensed - you can make your own fork and do as you please. So the mean developers can't really block any of your own stuff, you're always free to do that.

And if someone brings his or her own, I accept them with ever-present pleasure.


Except when someone brings improvements using the ALS renderer - which you do not like - then bitter arguments follow and you reject contributions.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11748
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby helijah » Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:09 pm

Thorsten wrote in Sun Oct 06, 2019 2:46 pm:But - OpenSource is GPL licensed - you can make your own fork and do as you please. So the mean developers can't really block any of your own stuff, you're always free to do that.


you just keep repeating the same thing over and over again without even knowing the people you're talking to. So that's it. My real job for over 30 years has been: analyst programmer in the industry. I have aligned millions of lines of code all this time and today I enjoy myself with Blender and leave it to others to believe that they are superior because they know programming languages. Personally, it always made me laugh.
It is so easy to ask others to do what you have been refusing for 6 years.

I'm tired of programming, I've been around it and I won't learn anything with it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I coded 3D before OpenGL or Direct X etc. We had to do everything ourselves......... And indeed like you for the 3D pyramid of old simulators, I don't consider the use of libraries, ready-made bricks, modern "languages" as programming. I have programmed the very heart of computers as an assembler. The current programming is of no interest to me and I assume it.

But that doesn't stop me from having a global vision of the work needed to integrate OSGEarth into FLightGear and understand the interest it can have for the project as a whole.

There are two main types of FlightGear users.

1 - Those who want to drive liners. Leave Paris and go to New Yok etc... Indeed for these people the photorealistic sets are not very interesting. I would like to acknowledge that. Beautiful airports (and I am the author of the integration of Roissy Charles de Gaule, Orly...etc...is not going to say that I have to do it I have already actively participated)

2 - Those who like planes, and just planes to make visual flights. Small ceased or old WWII hunters etc.... For them it is important to have a visual realism. Benchmarks, recognizing regions etc..... Have fun flying over their RL region and see their house for example (would only be shown in pictures).

And even if there are more Liners pilots on the servers (which is logical because it is useful for this type of flight), there are obviously more users of small aircraft in the world. And that's who I'm thinking about. Not to me. Simply because I personally do not use FLightGear. I have been flying simulators for over 30 years starting with FS I. I only use it to test my models and offer a minimum usable. Losing time thinking I'm a pilot when I never would be is not a pleasure.
Last edited by helijah on Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Some planes (and other) for FlightGear
http://helijah.free.fr
and
http://embaranger.free.fr
User avatar
helijah
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Chartres (France)
Callsign: helijah
IRC name: helijah
Version: GIT
OS: GNU/Linux

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby helijah » Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:13 pm

GinGin I found another number that talks about FG. It was the arrival of version 3. Here are the pages in question:

Image

Image
Image
Image
Image

Regards Emmanuel

P.S. It should be noted that these people, simulation professionals, consider FlightGear as much as X-Plane or FS or P3D. It is obvious that the comparison is mandatory, logical and normal.
Some planes (and other) for FlightGear
http://helijah.free.fr
and
http://embaranger.free.fr
User avatar
helijah
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Chartres (France)
Callsign: helijah
IRC name: helijah
Version: GIT
OS: GNU/Linux

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby Thorsten » Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:08 pm

It is so easy to ask others to do what you have been refusing for 6 years.


Indeed - that's probably why you do it all the time. :mrgreen:

Seriously - you've been asking this because you want it and you refuse to work on it. I've not refused anyone, I've just stated that I'm not interested.

But that doesn't stop me from having a global vision of the work needed to integrate OSGEarth into FLightGear and understand the interest it can have for the project as a whole.


So have I - except it doesn't include OSGEarth. So have James, Richard, Stuart, TorstenD - except it doesn't include OSGEarth either.

The main difference is - some of us do something about our vision, some of us do not. And the ones who do something about their vision see it in FG sooner or later, the others... do not.

So by all means enjoy your vision, but don't blame others if it doesn't ever materialize if you refuse to do anything about it.

For them it is important to have a visual realism.


... which photo-scenery generally doesn't really provide, because it is far too coarse close to the ground, it doesn't interact well with time of the day, month or the year or weather,... in fact it basically looks good only when you run FG under the same conditions when it was recorded and fly at the altitude it was recorded.

Whereas the approach we have now generates 10 cm sized details on the ground which interact with a craft ('rotor wash' - really good to see grass moving when you land a helicopter to gauge distance to the ground...) - so I think it is way superior to photo-scenery.

But... to each his own - as has been said a couple of times, there's nobody against photo-scenery or OSGEarth, just the people who claim to really like it never do anything about it. So it's not there.

As simple as that.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11748
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby legoboyvdlp » Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:32 pm

As you point out, we are not here to obey constraints. So why would you allow yourself to force someone to create finished planes!

At what level do you find it appropriate to force someone to do what you want?

I would just like to point out that OSGEareth was proposed 6 years ago and rejected as it was explained at the time and that it continues to do so. It's sad.


This is false. As far as I am aware you responded to bugman's post where he pointed that out, so not sure how you managed to "forget" what actually happened. When you start responding with fabrications I am not sure it is even wise to continue speaking to you.


And when someone asks me for improvements, I make them without any problem. And if someone brings his or her own, I accept them with ever-present pleasure.


Ok - how about this - you add procedural lights, a windshield glass effect, interior shadows, and a proper 3D cockpit to your 737-100 and I'll bring you a JSBSIM FDM - incidentally I have enough documentation to do so if I was interested in it - but lack of time might be a problem :roll:


And that's who I'm thinking about. Not to me. Simply because I personally do not use FLightGear. I have been flying simulators for over 30 years starting with FS I. I only use it to test my models and offer a minimum usable. Losing time thinking I'm a pilot when I never would be is not a pleasure.


I have never driven except on various practice sessions - obviously I would be looked on as rather odd if I started demanding that all cars should have the clutch on the right and the accelerator on the left because I happened to be left-handed. I don't think I need to say more - my point should be obvious...



...consider FlightGear as much as X-Plane or FS or P3D. It is obvious that the comparison is mandatory, logical and normal.

What isn't quite so obvious to you perhaps is that in each of those cases - photo-scenery is only achieved using expensive addons - no simulator has photoscenery by default (and those who actually have experience in 3D rendering have told us good reasons why that is already)!

I am also reminded of this infographic which I came across today...
Image
User avatar
legoboyvdlp
 
Posts: 7784
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Location: Northern Ireland
Callsign: G-LEGO
Version: next
OS: Windows 10 HP

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby wlbragg » Sun Oct 06, 2019 5:20 pm

Here, we can all eat our heart out now. If it were my choice and I could direct development, I would demand this with some of our best tech tied in such as weather and FDM. I sure as heck wouldn't be pushing for a photo anymore.
Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout
Intel i5 3570K AMDRX480
User avatar
wlbragg
 
Posts: 5769
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:31 pm
Location: Kansas (Tornado Alley), USA
Callsign: WC2020
Version: next
OS: Win10/Linux/AMDRX480

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby bugman » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:23 pm

I would have liked to have seen this integrated, however the author left it in a broken, messy, abandoned state. There are not many core developers and no one was willing or interested in picking up the pieces. The work involved would have been considerable. Had Jeff made a new merge request with the problems fixed, it would have likely been accepted.

Note that there are new discussions on the mailing list (and in private) about a new world scenery design that would make it easier for photo scenery to be integrated. However I cannot even slightly imagine anyone interested in photo scenery willing to write the required code. Same problem as always!

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1804
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Next-generation scenery generating?

Postby wlbragg » Sun Oct 06, 2019 9:47 pm

I would have liked to have seen this integrated

So would I. I like the idea MS is developing, to use machine learning and pattern recognition on top of the Bing satellite date. There are ways around seasons and such. I think some version of OSM building data as the base for geometry coupled with pattern and color recognition of photo scenes, extensive shader use, etc.
No matter what technique, it's going to take a concerted effort on the part of as many bodies as we can get to make any of it happen.
Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout
Intel i5 3570K AMDRX480
User avatar
wlbragg
 
Posts: 5769
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2012 11:31 pm
Location: Kansas (Tornado Alley), USA
Callsign: WC2020
Version: next
OS: Win10/Linux/AMDRX480

PreviousNext

Return to Scenery

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest