Good afternoon simmers,
My photogrammetry scenery still looks terrible despite doing a manual cache for London.
All settings are set to high and I have a pretty good spec computer, connected via eth, not wifi.
32gb ram
RTX 3070
Intel 5 - 10th gen
This is London
Any ideas?
Its the quality of the photogrammetry, and there wonāt be anything you can do about that.
Thereās this common misconception over what PG is I think, and some users think that it should look like a handcraft model in quality, even when zoomed in, and the āfixā is to wait long enough for the good quality data to stream in, or manually cache it. None of that will help.
If you look into how PG is generated, the technology, and techniques, you will begin to understand why it looks like it does sometimes. Look at the model of the Gherkin in the background, for example. It clearly looks better than the others because it was handcrafted.
PG will likely never look as good as that because of how the technology works.
I had a PG app on my phone once. I played around with the tech for about an hour, then abandoned it. It wasnāt a serious investigation into the tech, I just happened to notice this free app. What I did was take a small sculpture, and placed it on a table cloth with a solid, contrasting neutral colour. I then moved around the table it was on with the app, taking about 20 or so different pictures from different positions, and angles. The app then assembled a 3D object from all those photosā¦which looked barely anything like the original sculpture. From some angles it looked okay, but on others these artefacts we see in London, and elsewhere, were apparent as well.
Going back to your image, if you instead overfly London at a few thousand feet it looks incredible.
Yes Orbx London Landmarks. It improves the buildings along the Themas massively as well as adding several bridge models. The original Asobo/Gaya models are retained.
The handcrafted models will put less strain on the system as they tend to be tidier than their PG cousins. Iāve not actually re-tested EGLC with PG off, but I would imagine its frame heavy in that region because of the all the structures with fine detail, like overhead power lines, cranes, rooves with mesh structures etc.
I fly with PG off, I prefer the ācleanerā look of AI buildings, not to mention the increased performance. I would like to see more variety in AI buildings but I am happy using AI with scenery packs such as Orbx London Landmarks
The widely held view is to turn photogrammetry off. It offers very little over the AI buildings.
As this isnāt a bug, topic moved into Community Help Center #self-service:scenery
When posting in bugs, use the template provided.
Photogrammetry in MSFS is similar to the DirectX10 for FSXā¦ an experiment gone wrong. Turn it off is also my recommendation.
Itās very kind of you to take the time to write this reply. Interesting insight 
Iām sure I have seen YouTube videos of simmers flying over London and getting much better graphicsā¦ maybe Iām wrong.
This is the critical qualifier. Flying over London is fine, but dropping to street level is not. 
If you use a free app and only take 20 photos, its not a surprise your object came out bad.
Thatās my point. Some PG in the game is really good, others are not, and the source data is the issue, not some configuration item in the sim, nor how long you wait for the data to download.
Iāve never had the impression thatās a widely held view. PG has its downsides but decent PG from a few hundred feet up is always far, far superior to the Blackshark autogen efforts. Especially with older European cities.
PG only looks dodgy at very low levels in something like the H145.
There is a performance hit with it for sure though.
Then poor PG is a feature. 
I too went with PG off for a while and I too thought everything looked cleaner.
Howeverā¦
When I flew around St Louis, the Arch was a brick office building with PG off. Thatās a pretty big immersion killer and overall not acceptable. So Iāve got PG back on because I donāt really know how many āSt Louis Archāsā Iām missing without knowing it with PG off.
Darn if you do, darn if you donāt 
As I have said before, if Blackshark can do what it does just by looking down on the world, imagine what it or something like it could do if it could work as an intermediate between PG and the sim? It could clean up the geometry, improve the colour saturation and buildings would look amazing. Its a dream I haveā¦
MSFS is a good flight simulator but a very poor driving simulator. Aircraft should not be flying at street level which is why street level view looks awful. The scenery is optimized to be viewed from the air.
Google Maps and Google Earth shift graphics engines to display their street view. Looking at Google scenery right before the shift to street view displays some pretty bad PG (?) images for buildings, IMHO a lot worse than MSFS PG.
Someday they will be able to combine it all using streetview data as well dreams real hard
