20,741
edits
Using OSM Vector Data in FlightGear: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Using OSM Vector Data in FlightGear (view source)
Revision as of 15:40, 31 January 2014
, 31 January 2014→Procedural Buildings & Cities (radi & vanosten): http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=17598&start=15#p177152
m (→Procedural Airports (psadro_gm, zakalawe, papillon81): DRAPING, as per: http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=17598&start=15#p177131) |
(→Procedural Buildings & Cities (radi & vanosten): http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=17598&start=15#p177152) |
||
| Line 188: | Line 188: | ||
But storing pre-processed data could be an option. A typical scene now easily contains 50k buildings. Reducing that to, say, 10k, should fit into well under 1MB. And of course I could modify the script to generate that outline data. Perhaps we can come up with a spec of the outline data at FSweekend. | But storing pre-processed data could be an option. A typical scene now easily contains 50k buildings. Reducing that to, say, 10k, should fit into well under 1MB. And of course I could modify the script to generate that outline data. Perhaps we can come up with a spec of the outline data at FSweekend. | ||
I wrote a similar script recently, using python. Got Dresden (EDDC) area populated with some 20,000 buildings from OSM. There is some frame rate impact, but I still get ~20fps on an i5-2500k/GeForce 650TI/Ubuntu. | |||
I put all buildings in one .ac file. Loading time is pretty quick, maybe some 5 seconds more than the default scenery. I pre-calculate the elevation: I extract the elevation on a rectangular grid (10m step size) from FG in the relevant area once using a slightly modified version of http://wiki.flightgear.org/Howto:Get_a_number_of_elevation_offsets_for_a_number_of_objects. Then the script loads the elevation data, and linearly interpolates elevation at the buildings positions. | |||
Some facade texturing is also done. Roof geometry and texturing is still work in progress | |||
'''vanosten:''' I understand there are advantages to do stuff on the fly - it might be even faster to do calculations than reading detailed info like ac-files from the file system. However I wonder whether it really is the same thing that people try to accomplish. Together with Radi I want with osm2city make a plausible world, which satisfies also someone on sightseeing with a helicopter, who knows the area. The other is generating a plausible world. The first one needs a lot of parametrization and logic on a per object level. If the first one can be satisfied with on-the-fly processing, then I would look into porting code to C++ and learning C++. If not, then potentially we should leave the initiatives apart? | '''vanosten:''' I understand there are advantages to do stuff on the fly - it might be even faster to do calculations than reading detailed info like ac-files from the file system. However I wonder whether it really is the same thing that people try to accomplish. Together with Radi I want with osm2city make a plausible world, which satisfies also someone on sightseeing with a helicopter, who knows the area. The other is generating a plausible world. The first one needs a lot of parametrization and logic on a per object level. If the first one can be satisfied with on-the-fly processing, then I would look into porting code to C++ and learning C++. If not, then potentially we should leave the initiatives apart? | ||