Very bad photogrammetry

Hi. This is what I see with Photogrammetry set to ON! Is there a solution to improve the situation?
Kind Regards.!

Yes, the photogrammetry either needs to be redone by the data provider, or at least tidied up by them. There is nothing we as end users can do, other then turn it off if it causes us issues.

1 Like

Moved to #self-service:scenery

you can start to use the forum search function, then you find existing topics and may also such kind where you can vote for improvments: Search results for 'bad photogrammetry' - Microsoft Flight Simulator Forums

May one example:

3 Likes

Ok. Thanks to all on this forum for the help.
My thinking is this: ok, MSFS is a flight simulator….but if you (Asobo and Microsoft) decides to introduce this interesting function (photogrammetry) your duty is to make it works!
Obviously this is a message for Asobo and Microsoft developers.
Regards.

Asobo didn’t create the photogrammetry data, only implementing it in the sim.

The people that created the data then provided the data to MS/Asobo are the ones to improve the data.

Your suggestion is kind of like me complaining to Samsung that the quality of programming on BBC 1 is terrible. :wink:

2 Likes

may check out the forums voting system…

Ok. But who has chosen the supplier to provide for photogrammetry data? And who has tested MSFS before to release it at certain costs?

Regarding choice, my best guess is that there isn’t really a huge market in which to choose from. Access to aerial data, or satellite data, is quite possible very niche, so they get what they can.

Not sure about your last. I don’t think cost comes in to it, but might if there were two or more data providers for a given city. In that case they might choose the cheapest.

this category is for:

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/about-the-community-help-center-category/120429

I gave you the hint to existing topic in Bug Category. We not want to discuss about “who is a bad one” in this category…

Absolutely no. I’m not searching for who’s the bad one.
But try to understand me. Have you seen the picture? Do you think it’s normal for a software whit a certain cost?

It depends what outcome you expect of this thread. It’s “normal” for some PG implementations, but not others. Some PG is really well done, others not so much.

1 Like

it is what @hobanagerik mentioned

therefore checkout the existing topic and you can vote if you want.

And nope, msfs is the cheapest flight-sim on the market and you get the whole world for free.
So, its for me ( only for me ) not a bug that may be not each mm² of the world is available in high-res. But there is room for optimizations, may be like fallbacks to normal 3d view, or what ever is possible.

1 Like

Hi @Res729014,
I would suggest using the existing topic on this so that issues are not split:

Photogrammetry is done by another source, and it looks OK from higher altitude than it does close up. This photogrammetry is offered to us end users for free. You have an option to turn this off.

Closing this topic. Please contribute to the other topic.

Thank you.

3 Likes