I'm curious if this would be possible in a future version of SB: Convert LWM2 polys to LWM3 polys using mesh data...
I think this would lead to some very convincing and accurate rivers, without much effort.
Any thoughts?
Best,
sg
Make LWM3 using mesh?
Make LWM3 using mesh?
Happy new year all!
I'm curious if this would be possible in a future version of SB: Convert LWM2 polys to LWM3 polys using mesh data...
I think this would lead to some very convincing and accurate rivers, without much effort.
Any thoughts?
Best,
sg
I'm curious if this would be possible in a future version of SB: Convert LWM2 polys to LWM3 polys using mesh data...
I think this would lead to some very convincing and accurate rivers, without much effort.
Any thoughts?
Best,
sg
Hi Scott,
"Converting LWM2 to LWM3 using mesh ..." I am not following the idea. Please explain.
I think you know about "Make Flattens". This will read altitudes from a "Sbuilder bsq mesh file" and creates LWM3 polygons for a LOD13 quad.
But you refer to rivers... The most difficult part in making my Portugal Terrain was to adjust rivers to the valleys. I have done that manually point by point. That was the reason why I added "digitizing pen tablet" support to Sbuilder.
Regards and Happy New Year,
Luis
"Converting LWM2 to LWM3 using mesh ..." I am not following the idea. Please explain.
I think you know about "Make Flattens". This will read altitudes from a "Sbuilder bsq mesh file" and creates LWM3 polygons for a LOD13 quad.
But you refer to rivers... The most difficult part in making my Portugal Terrain was to adjust rivers to the valleys. I have done that manually point by point. That was the reason why I added "digitizing pen tablet" support to Sbuilder.
Regards and Happy New Year,
Luis
What I mean is this:
When you "make flattens", each point in the triangular polygons is set to an elevation as defined by a bsq2bmp mesh. It seems that since this works, it should be possible to set the elevation of each point of *ANY* LWM polygon based on a mesh, thus water polygons could be converted to LWM3 flattens which would perfectly match the mesh and the water. That would be an excellent start at properly elevating the rivers and other bodies of water, requiring manual tweaking instead of complete manual entry. Does that make sense?
When you "make flattens", each point in the triangular polygons is set to an elevation as defined by a bsq2bmp mesh. It seems that since this works, it should be possible to set the elevation of each point of *ANY* LWM polygon based on a mesh, thus water polygons could be converted to LWM3 flattens which would perfectly match the mesh and the water. That would be an excellent start at properly elevating the rivers and other bodies of water, requiring manual tweaking instead of complete manual entry. Does that make sense?
Hello,
You have to think about two different approaches.
You have DEM and vectors.
Will they fit? No, for most freeware data.
Because, then you can use simple -9999 and the river is following the DEM (“meshclinging”, people call this).
You can interpolate the DEM, to get this (not with Sbuilder)
Using the z values for vectors you can make in Sbuilder “tilted polygons”.
But it is a straight line (or the algorithm)
In a GIS tool you can bring the polygon vertices to 3D (to get z) and try to define from a ratser polygon a line (digitizing – via line and not boundaries). And then the line to 3D.
So you have two “things” to calculate – the line and the polygon z, from the DEM.
(not getting big cliffs)
You can use Sbuilder via scripting and sbx.
Complicated and confusing (and brief), sorry.
Kind regards
Horst
You have to think about two different approaches.
You have DEM and vectors.
Will they fit? No, for most freeware data.
Because, then you can use simple -9999 and the river is following the DEM (“meshclinging”, people call this).
You can interpolate the DEM, to get this (not with Sbuilder)
Using the z values for vectors you can make in Sbuilder “tilted polygons”.
But it is a straight line (or the algorithm)
In a GIS tool you can bring the polygon vertices to 3D (to get z) and try to define from a ratser polygon a line (digitizing – via line and not boundaries). And then the line to 3D.
So you have two “things” to calculate – the line and the polygon z, from the DEM.
(not getting big cliffs)
You can use Sbuilder via scripting and sbx.
Complicated and confusing (and brief), sorry.
Kind regards
Horst
-
JPHespanha
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:25 am
- Location: Portugal
- Contact:
I would consider Gridley idea for a "wish list" regarding next version of SBuilder [:D]
It will simplify a lot operations concerning LWM3 polygons such as rivers. Doing this manually, by adjusting each vertex height with the mesh or underlying LWM default flats works, but it is a heavy work to do.
Notice that -9999 instruction does not work with SBuilder, unless you like to see "earth nedlles" towering to the moon (or holes to earth's center).
JP Hespanha
---------------------
NBL3007; IVAO: 117151
It will simplify a lot operations concerning LWM3 polygons such as rivers. Doing this manually, by adjusting each vertex height with the mesh or underlying LWM default flats works, but it is a heavy work to do.
Notice that -9999 instruction does not work with SBuilder, unless you like to see "earth nedlles" towering to the moon (or holes to earth's center).
JP Hespanha
---------------------
NBL3007; IVAO: 117151
Hi
Here some ideas gained from the building of Portugal Terrain. I had reasonable DEM data. When there was a lake or a reservoir in a mountain region I could see a constant green color giving the altitude of the water level. So I decided to add the possibility to assign any color (normally I used blue - water after all) to a particular green (altitude) color. Then as I said I had to make the polygon by hand, or if I had vector data for the lake/reservoir, I had to edit the points along the banks to avoid cliffs and anti-cliffs.
Now regarding rivers that go to the sea. I took the example of rivers Tagus that goes to Lisbon. At Lisbon the water altitude is 0 meters. But in Santarém (some 80 kms from the mouth of the river) the water altitude in my DEM data was (I quoting by memory) about 15 meters. Between Santarem and Lisbon there is no water fall. The river is quite wide and should be made as LWM polygons. Unfortunatelly, at that time, I had not implemented LWM3. So I divided the 80 km long (by some 300 meters wide) LWM polygon in 4 x 20 km long and I assigned the altitudes of 0, 5, 10 and 15 meters as I was going from Lisbon to Santarem. The 5 meter steps are hardly seen in the sim.
If I had to rebuild the river I will join the for 4 polygons back to a single one and give all points the altitude of 10 meters. Than I would pick up one point near the sea and would give it the altitude of 0. Then I would pick up one point near Santarem and I would give it the altitude of 15 meters. Then I would force the polygon to have a progressive altitude! All points will get an intermediate altitude and they will belong to the same plane surface - a tilted surface that has no steps and that decreases the altitude smoothly from 15 to 0 meters.
I know this is not what you asked for but it can be useful.
Regards,
Luis
Here some ideas gained from the building of Portugal Terrain. I had reasonable DEM data. When there was a lake or a reservoir in a mountain region I could see a constant green color giving the altitude of the water level. So I decided to add the possibility to assign any color (normally I used blue - water after all) to a particular green (altitude) color. Then as I said I had to make the polygon by hand, or if I had vector data for the lake/reservoir, I had to edit the points along the banks to avoid cliffs and anti-cliffs.
Now regarding rivers that go to the sea. I took the example of rivers Tagus that goes to Lisbon. At Lisbon the water altitude is 0 meters. But in Santarém (some 80 kms from the mouth of the river) the water altitude in my DEM data was (I quoting by memory) about 15 meters. Between Santarem and Lisbon there is no water fall. The river is quite wide and should be made as LWM polygons. Unfortunatelly, at that time, I had not implemented LWM3. So I divided the 80 km long (by some 300 meters wide) LWM polygon in 4 x 20 km long and I assigned the altitudes of 0, 5, 10 and 15 meters as I was going from Lisbon to Santarem. The 5 meter steps are hardly seen in the sim.
If I had to rebuild the river I will join the for 4 polygons back to a single one and give all points the altitude of 10 meters. Than I would pick up one point near the sea and would give it the altitude of 0. Then I would pick up one point near Santarem and I would give it the altitude of 15 meters. Then I would force the polygon to have a progressive altitude! All points will get an intermediate altitude and they will belong to the same plane surface - a tilted surface that has no steps and that decreases the altitude smoothly from 15 to 0 meters.
I know this is not what you asked for but it can be useful.
Regards,
Luis
Since I use Slarti to make the water, then import the LWMs to SBuilder for editing, I find that the water features to match FS mesh really well. However, not perfectly - to I was thinking that simply using some method to take those existing polygons, and apply an altitude derived from SRTM mesh and create an LWM3 (flatten or water mask) which matches the existing water would fix several problems - it would match the real world elevation data pretty well creating not just evenly descending rivers, but accurately descending rivers, water falls, etc.; it would also flatten the water in the scenery so even if the water didn't match the mesh perfectly, it should be pretty decent...
Just a thought!
Just a thought!
Hello,
I will try do upload some screenshots.
I hope you can see them.
?? Sorry, I am stupid to do that.
However, I wrote the text, so I will post the text without screenshots (not informative):
I could find some screenshots for a scenery I did myself for BC, Canada (one year ago, I never shared)).
Tilted polygons are nice to use, and Luis did a good job. Try it, as Luis described (but take care)
Tilted1:
This show some vectors I imported only with -9999 (“meshclinging”) (river and shoreline, without effect).
The water mask cut the scenery with no height.
Going up and downhill.
(I used a different datum between the DEM and the vectors, to see a better influence. The data fit normal quite good).
Tilted2:
I am using “tilted polygons” for this tributary. The “roads” are “meshclinging”. No offset from the terrain.cfg, and no important influence to the DEM. Looks natural.
Tilted3:
Now I am using the offset from the terrain.cfg for the roads. Unnatural
Tilted4:
Abnormal situation (road), you can avoid using a higher TMVL .(worldwide) or LOD for DEM (when you have accurate data)
Now you can read the blog article form Mike Gilbert:
http://blogs.msdn.com/tdragger/archive/ ... 93012.aspx
Tilted5:
Some rivers for this area.
Tilted6:
Zoomed in to a part!
You have to start with the main, and then the tributaries.
You are coming back to define the small islands for the river (textures), or the roads, or bridges.
So you can use “tilted” polygons, because you are reworking all the data to get nice textures.
Tilted7:
Take care not to raise the river heights.
Luis is doing an incredible small GIS – FS tool!
And the most difficult “thing” is to “play” in mountain areas! There you can find the most abnormal “things”.
Tilted8 and 9:
I have fun to fly around in this visualized earth.
Kind regards
Horst
I will try do upload some screenshots.
I hope you can see them.
?? Sorry, I am stupid to do that.
However, I wrote the text, so I will post the text without screenshots (not informative):
I could find some screenshots for a scenery I did myself for BC, Canada (one year ago, I never shared)).
Tilted polygons are nice to use, and Luis did a good job. Try it, as Luis described (but take care)
Tilted1:
This show some vectors I imported only with -9999 (“meshclinging”) (river and shoreline, without effect).
The water mask cut the scenery with no height.
Going up and downhill.
(I used a different datum between the DEM and the vectors, to see a better influence. The data fit normal quite good).
Tilted2:
I am using “tilted polygons” for this tributary. The “roads” are “meshclinging”. No offset from the terrain.cfg, and no important influence to the DEM. Looks natural.
Tilted3:
Now I am using the offset from the terrain.cfg for the roads. Unnatural
Tilted4:
Abnormal situation (road), you can avoid using a higher TMVL .(worldwide) or LOD for DEM (when you have accurate data)
Now you can read the blog article form Mike Gilbert:
http://blogs.msdn.com/tdragger/archive/ ... 93012.aspx
Tilted5:
Some rivers for this area.
Tilted6:
Zoomed in to a part!
You have to start with the main, and then the tributaries.
You are coming back to define the small islands for the river (textures), or the roads, or bridges.
So you can use “tilted” polygons, because you are reworking all the data to get nice textures.
Tilted7:
Take care not to raise the river heights.
Luis is doing an incredible small GIS – FS tool!
And the most difficult “thing” is to “play” in mountain areas! There you can find the most abnormal “things”.
Tilted8 and 9:
I have fun to fly around in this visualized earth.
Kind regards
Horst