Will there eventually be a way to replace the trees in photogrammetry?

Hey y’all, this whole photogrammetry thing is all new to me, so just trying to understand.

The buildings are one thing and I can live with those, but the trees are flat out ugly at ground level. I KNOW it’s a “flight” simulator and not a ground simulator, but when you are on the runway or taking off it just makes the whole experience feel disappointing.

NOW this is ONLY my opinion, I’m sure others don’t care a a tiny bit about it, BUT I am curious as to how this effect might be fixed, I mean trees?

I would fly without photogrammetry BUT then things like some landmark bridges, the Hollywood sign, and some things like that are GONE, so I tend to fly with it on.

But then I get trees (and bushes) that look like this:

These are just small examples of a nasty effect on the trees and shrubs, there is one airport (X39 here in Tampa) my home airport, where the trees, that DO NOT in real life line the runway, look like walls of ugly pixel vomit.

I KNOW it’s new tech, I’m JUST suggesting, OR asking if there is any way, that maybe autogen trees could be added to fix this, ON JUST the trees, and not affect the buildings and other detail?

Because it it could be done, the effect would be AMAZING!!

Discussion/question

If the devs had more time to finish development they probably would have found a way to suppress the tree geometry in photogrammetry areas. Maybe Azure or Blackshark AI could do that. For now the overlaying trees must be bigger than these blocks and spikes, making cities often look like jungles.
Google photogrammetry provides better results with trees so there’s definitely room for improvement.

1 Like

Probably will always be like this. The photogrammetry is harder for an ai then just 2d textures. Those tree’s are generated with height data as well. They vary from color alot and i think it’s impossible to let an ai figure out where to flatten the mesh.

Only solution will be the use of higher quality photogrammetry like google earth. But don’t count on bing updating to this level of detail in the near future.

I agree that those tree’s look awfull, But on the other hand… i also think in total, these photogrammetry areas look great. Even if there’s some of these nonsense and too much tree’s. I’d rather see a full lively city that might be a little overgrown, Then an empty building only dead looking ghosttown.

I have to agree, I tried just the Bing autogen? with photogrammetry unchecked, and it’s ok, but no where near as good as the photogrammetry, there is just too much missing.

Oh well, I’m going to hold out hope that there MIGHT be some way of dressing up with autogen trees, at LEAST in small areas around airports. The rest of it can be overlooked once airborne.