GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Wow! fast reply. Thanks Tom, I will try that.
That worked Ok and I now have calibration points data.
One more question;
How do I save the SS so that I can access it with the scenery data again?
That worked Ok and I now have calibration points data.
One more question;
How do I save the SS so that I can access it with the scenery data again?
Condor CN = E20
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Hi Tom,
I tried to follow your tutorial but I not understand someting.
When you use 3DEM you don't convert the file to UTM at this moment. I didn't find that you made that conversion at all. Maybe it my mistake because is not easy reading English to me.
With no convertion and using your calibration data from your spreashet, the distance between wp is incorrect
I don't know if I lost something when I read or have another mistake.
BTW, I try to use the SAS.Planet program to obtain satellites images
Regards,
Luis
I tried to follow your tutorial but I not understand someting.
When you use 3DEM you don't convert the file to UTM at this moment. I didn't find that you made that conversion at all. Maybe it my mistake because is not easy reading English to me.
With no convertion and using your calibration data from your spreashet, the distance between wp is incorrect
I don't know if I lost something when I read or have another mistake.
BTW, I try to use the SAS.Planet program to obtain satellites images
Regards,
Luis
- Jan Oorthuijsen
- Posts: 491
- Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 4:27 pm
- Location: Utrecht (Terwijde) - Holland
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Hi luis,
Read my questions page 3 and 4.
Grts, Jan
Read my questions page 3 and 4.
Grts, Jan
PH-722
WW
It’s Difficult to Soar Like An Eagle
When You’re surrounded By Turkeys
WW
It’s Difficult to Soar Like An Eagle
When You’re surrounded By Turkeys
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
"How do I save the SS so that I can access it with the scenery data again?"
The spreadsheet is a template. When you open it, you will get a Google Sheets file that is yours. Here is more info: https://support.google.com/docs/answer/ ... ktop&hl=en
The spreadsheet is a template. When you open it, you will get a Google Sheets file that is yours. Here is more info: https://support.google.com/docs/answer/ ... ktop&hl=en
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
"With no convertion and using your calibration data from your spreashet, the distance between wp is incorrect"
Luis, the SRTM data is already in UTM format. As Jan notes we discussed this on pages 3/4 of this thread. Are you at a high latitude?
After much investigation, I have concluded that this distortion is the result of Condor's method for creating scenery. The scenery is represented as a grid of pixels and those pixels are assigned a certain size. Because the grid is square and latitude lines are NOT square, this distortion is inherent in the method for scenery creation and it becomes more apparent the closer one gets to either pole.
I believe the source of this is the SRTM data and it is the reason that NASA does not supply SRTM data near the poles - the distortion is too great.
Luis, the SRTM data is already in UTM format. As Jan notes we discussed this on pages 3/4 of this thread. Are you at a high latitude?
After much investigation, I have concluded that this distortion is the result of Condor's method for creating scenery. The scenery is represented as a grid of pixels and those pixels are assigned a certain size. Because the grid is square and latitude lines are NOT square, this distortion is inherent in the method for scenery creation and it becomes more apparent the closer one gets to either pole.
I believe the source of this is the SRTM data and it is the reason that NASA does not supply SRTM data near the poles - the distortion is too great.
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Thanks Jan for your anwser. I read it. The problem is complex. I'm lost!!!Jan Oorthuijsen wrote:Hi luis,
Read my questions page 3 and 4.
Grts, Jan
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
My airport is at -39º, -67.62º. I'm closer to equator than youtberry wrote:"With no convertion and using your calibration data from your spreashet, the distance between wp is incorrect"
Luis, the SRTM data is already in UTM format. As Jan notes we discussed this on pages 3/4 of this thread. Are you at a high latitude?
After much investigation, I have concluded that this distortion is the result of Condor's method for creating scenery. The scenery is represented as a grid of pixels and those pixels are assigned a certain size. Because the grid is square and latitude lines are NOT square, this distortion is inherent in the method for scenery creation and it becomes more apparent the closer one gets to either pole.
I believe the source of this is the SRTM data and it is the reason that NASA does not supply SRTM data near the poles - the distortion is too great.
That are my data in the sreadsheet:
Code: Select all
Input data
Longitude (X) Latitude (Y)
Desired scenery center pont -67.62000000 -39.00000000
Width (X) Height (Y)
Desired scenery size in terragens 10 14
Scenery clipping details Point 1 (upper left) Point 2 (lower right)
X -68.68662400 -66.55337600
Y -37.50672640 -40.49327360
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
I was thinking about the problem and made the following test.
I used excel calibration tools from Lurik and made a new calibration point file. For clarity I only used 4 values (Cells L43 to L45)
0,0,-40.56582186,-66.18171986
230400,0,-40.60023145,-68.90325931
230400,322560,-37.6936068,-68.90715888
0,322560,-37.66256638,-66.29515128
Now the distance is correct as you can see here:
Is not a good calibration, all point are displace to north of it real position
I put both calibration files in QGIS, with one of my geotiff images tha I made with SAS.Planet program
I don't know how follow from here. I'll do more test, but any help will be apreciated.
I used excel calibration tools from Lurik and made a new calibration point file. For clarity I only used 4 values (Cells L43 to L45)
0,0,-40.56582186,-66.18171986
230400,0,-40.60023145,-68.90325931
230400,322560,-37.6936068,-68.90715888
0,322560,-37.66256638,-66.29515128
Now the distance is correct as you can see here:
Is not a good calibration, all point are displace to north of it real position
I put both calibration files in QGIS, with one of my geotiff images tha I made with SAS.Planet program
I don't know how follow from here. I'll do more test, but any help will be apreciated.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Jan, I move my answer here, because I think that this discussion is better make in this post.Jan Oorthuijsen wrote:Hi Luis
Where is the conversion to the correct UTM projection ?,was my question a few years ago.
Now I know that in Qgis you need to do the conversion through, Raster> Projections> Warp (reproject).
And than Cut with ,Raster> Extraction> Correct Clipper (Multiple of23040m ) .
Did not get a correct answer and therefore I stopped follow that tutorial.
Do not forget to correct the size (look in hdr file) by -45 m and + 50 m , If you follow the old method
Search the forum for this.
Grts, WW
In what part of the tutorial do you have to do the conversion and the cut?
Sorry about that silly question, but I tested many thing and I a little (big!!!) confused now.
I tried to follow the another method to make a photorealistic scenery, but I have troubles too. I'll write about it in the proper post.
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
Now I see. It does look like the calibration points tab is incorrect. I'll take a look at that and see if it is obvious what is wrong.
I suspect it has something to do with the southern hemisphere location. I originally built the spreadsheet for U.S. locations, then added southern hemisphere adjustments to it. As far as I know, it hasn't been used for that yet and I may not have thought it through completely. Sorry about that.
I suspect it has something to do with the southern hemisphere location. I originally built the spreadsheet for U.S. locations, then added southern hemisphere adjustments to it. As far as I know, it hasn't been used for that yet and I may not have thought it through completely. Sorry about that.
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
@luisbriones:
The reprojection is done at the end of the tutorial. The tutorial uses images in EPSG:3857 projection and reprojects them to EPSG:4326 (Condor) in the step prior to cutting the full mosaic.In what part of the tutorial do you have to do the conversion and the cut?
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
I saw this and always had a dude about it. You say EPSG:4326. I understand that is WGS84. Does Condor not work on UTM?tberry wrote:@luisbriones:The reprojection is done at the end of the tutorial. The tutorial uses images in EPSG:3857 projection and reprojects them to EPSG:4326 (Condor) in the step prior to cutting the full mosaic.In what part of the tutorial do you have to do the conversion and the cut?
By the way, I have partial success to make the images using P. Strzelec method. You are part of this success, because I learned QGIS from your tutorial. It's not finish yet, but look good.
Anyway if you wish I can help you to fixed your spreadsheet problems
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
I calculated the corner points by hand and came out with the same answer as the spreadsheet. Before we can figure out if there is a calibration error, I want to make sure I can at least get the same corner points as you did with Lurik's spreadsheet.I don't know how follow from here. I'll do more test, but any help will be apreciated.
Let us check a few things first. To make sure I understand:
1. The RED dots are the corners from my spreadsheet. The BLUE dots are the calibration points from Lurik's Excel spreadsheet, correct?
On my Google spreadsheet:
2. What number is in cells J16 and K16?
3. What number is in cells E24 and E25?
The reason I ask is that the width of the scenery is calculated mathematically and is based on values in those cells. Here's how it works:
-Each pixel of the SRTM data represents 90 meters. When you use Raster->Misc->Info on the SRTM data, it gives you the pixel size in decimal degrees and that number should be in cells E24 and E25 (it is the same for both width and height).
-Each terragen tile is 256 pixels of SRTM data. So, a terragen tile is 90meters X 256 pixels = 23,040 meters in width.
-Your scenery is 10 terragen tiles in width, so 23,040 X 10 = 230,400 meters in width. You may notice this value in the calibration points you posted.
-230,400 meters X the value in E24 (pixel size in decimal degrees) = width of the scenery across those 10 terragen tiles in decimal degrees.
I calculate the width of your scenery to be 2.133248 decimal degrees. The values you posted show it to be 2.72153945 degrees, which is slightly wider than I calculated.
I use that width to figure out the upper left, upper right, lower right, lower left corners of the scenery. If the pixel size in E24/E25 is changed, this would introduce an error in the size.
I still think there's probably an issue with shifting everything north, but first I wanted to figure out the correct corners.
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 4:56 pm
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
No. The RED are from Lurik and BLUE are yourstberry wrote: 1. The RED dots are the corners from my spreadsheet. The BLUE dots are the calibration points from Lurik's Excel spreadsheet, correct?
0.2133248 0.2133248tberry wrote: On my Google spreadsheet:
2. What number is in cells J16 and K16?
0.0008333tberry wrote: 3. What number is in cells E24 and E25?
0.0008333
I send you screen captures from the spreadsheet and the calibration point generated by then.
Code: Select all
92160 92160 -39.63997269 -67.40667725
92160 69120 -39.85329819 -67.40667725
92160 46080 -40.06662369 -67.40667725
92160 322560 -37.50672531 -67.40667725
92160 299520 -37.72005081 -67.40667725
92160 276480 -37.93337631 -67.40667725
92160 253440 -38.14670181 -67.40667725
92160 230400 -38.36002731 -67.40667725
92160 23040 -40.27994919 -67.40667725
92160 207360 -38.573349 -67.40667725
92160 184320 -38.7866745 -67.40667725
92160 161280 -39 -67.40667725
92160 138240 -39.2133255 -67.40667725
92160 115200 -39.426651 -67.40667725
92160 0 -40.49327469 -67.40667725
69120 92160 -39.63997269 -67.19335175
69120 69120 -39.85329819 -67.19335175
69120 46080 -40.06662369 -67.19335175
69120 322560 -37.50672531 -67.19335175
69120 299520 -37.72005081 -67.19335175
69120 276480 -37.93337631 -67.19335175
69120 253440 -38.14670181 -67.19335175
69120 230400 -38.36002731 -67.19335175
69120 23040 -40.27994919 -67.19335175
69120 207360 -38.573349 -67.19335175
69120 184320 -38.7866745 -67.19335175
69120 161280 -39 -67.19335175
69120 138240 -39.2133255 -67.19335175
69120 115200 -39.426651 -67.19335175
69120 0 -40.49327469 -67.19335175
46080 92160 -39.63997269 -66.98002625
46080 69120 -39.85329819 -66.98002625
46080 46080 -40.06662369 -66.98002625
46080 322560 -37.50672531 -66.98002625
46080 299520 -37.72005081 -66.98002625
46080 276480 -37.93337631 -66.98002625
46080 253440 -38.14670181 -66.98002625
46080 230400 -38.36002731 -66.98002625
46080 23040 -40.27994919 -66.98002625
46080 207360 -38.573349 -66.98002625
46080 184320 -38.7866745 -66.98002625
46080 161280 -39 -66.98002625
46080 138240 -39.2133255 -66.98002625
46080 115200 -39.426651 -66.98002625
46080 0 -40.49327469 -66.98002625
230400 92160 -39.63997269 -68.68662262
230400 69120 -39.85329819 -68.68662262
230400 46080 -40.06662369 -68.68662262
230400 322560 -37.50672531 -68.68662262
230400 299520 -37.72005081 -68.68662262
230400 276480 -37.93337631 -68.68662262
230400 253440 -38.14670181 -68.68662262
230400 230400 -38.36002731 -68.68662262
230400 23040 -40.27994919 -68.68662262
230400 207360 -38.573349 -68.68662262
230400 184320 -38.7866745 -68.68662262
230400 161280 -39 -68.68662262
230400 138240 -39.2133255 -68.68662262
230400 115200 -39.426651 -68.68662262
230400 0 -40.49327469 -68.68662262
23040 92160 -39.63997269 -66.76670074
23040 69120 -39.85329819 -66.76670074
23040 46080 -40.06662369 -66.76670074
23040 322560 -37.50672531 -66.76670074
23040 299520 -37.72005081 -66.76670074
23040 276480 -37.93337631 -66.76670074
23040 253440 -38.14670181 -66.76670074
23040 230400 -38.36002731 -66.76670074
23040 23040 -40.27994919 -66.76670074
23040 207360 -38.573349 -66.76670074
23040 184320 -38.7866745 -66.76670074
23040 161280 -39 -66.76670074
23040 138240 -39.2133255 -66.76670074
23040 115200 -39.426651 -66.76670074
23040 0 -40.49327469 -66.76670074
207360 92160 -39.63997269 -68.47329712
207360 69120 -39.85329819 -68.47329712
207360 46080 -40.06662369 -68.47329712
207360 322560 -37.50672531 -68.47329712
207360 299520 -37.72005081 -68.47329712
207360 276480 -37.93337631 -68.47329712
207360 253440 -38.14670181 -68.47329712
207360 230400 -38.36002731 -68.47329712
207360 23040 -40.27994919 -68.47329712
207360 207360 -38.573349 -68.47329712
207360 184320 -38.7866745 -68.47329712
207360 161280 -39 -68.47329712
207360 138240 -39.2133255 -68.47329712
207360 115200 -39.426651 -68.47329712
207360 0 -40.49327469 -68.47329712
184320 92160 -39.63997269 -68.25997162
184320 69120 -39.85329819 -68.25997162
184320 46080 -40.06662369 -68.25997162
184320 322560 -37.50672531 -68.25997162
184320 299520 -37.72005081 -68.25997162
184320 276480 -37.93337631 -68.25997162
184320 253440 -38.14670181 -68.25997162
184320 230400 -38.36002731 -68.25997162
184320 23040 -40.27994919 -68.25997162
184320 207360 -38.573349 -68.25997162
184320 184320 -38.7866745 -68.25997162
184320 161280 -39 -68.25997162
184320 138240 -39.2133255 -68.25997162
184320 115200 -39.426651 -68.25997162
184320 0 -40.49327469 -68.25997162
161280 92160 -39.63997269 -68.04664612
161280 69120 -39.85329819 -68.04664612
161280 46080 -40.06662369 -68.04664612
161280 322560 -37.50672531 -68.04664612
161280 299520 -37.72005081 -68.04664612
161280 276480 -37.93337631 -68.04664612
161280 253440 -38.14670181 -68.04664612
161280 230400 -38.36002731 -68.04664612
161280 23040 -40.27994919 -68.04664612
161280 207360 -38.573349 -68.04664612
161280 184320 -38.7866745 -68.04664612
161280 161280 -39 -68.04664612
161280 138240 -39.2133255 -68.04664612
161280 115200 -39.426651 -68.04664612
161280 0 -40.49327469 -68.04664612
138240 92160 -39.63997269 -67.83332825
138240 69120 -39.85329819 -67.83332825
138240 46080 -40.06662369 -67.83332825
138240 322560 -37.50672531 -67.83332825
138240 299520 -37.72005081 -67.83332825
138240 276480 -37.93337631 -67.83332825
138240 253440 -38.14670181 -67.83332825
138240 230400 -38.36002731 -67.83332825
138240 23040 -40.27994919 -67.83332825
138240 207360 -38.573349 -67.83332825
138240 184320 -38.7866745 -67.83332825
138240 161280 -39 -67.83332825
138240 138240 -39.2133255 -67.83332825
138240 115200 -39.426651 -67.83332825
138240 0 -40.49327469 -67.83332825
115200 92160 -39.63997269 -67.62000275
115200 69120 -39.85329819 -67.62000275
115200 46080 -40.06662369 -67.62000275
115200 322560 -37.50672531 -67.62000275
115200 299520 -37.72005081 -67.62000275
115200 276480 -37.93337631 -67.62000275
115200 253440 -38.14670181 -67.62000275
115200 230400 -38.36002731 -67.62000275
115200 23040 -40.27994919 -67.62000275
115200 207360 -38.573349 -67.62000275
115200 184320 -38.7866745 -67.62000275
115200 161280 -39 -67.62000275
115200 138240 -39.2133255 -67.62000275
115200 115200 -39.426651 -67.62000275
115200 0 -40.49327469 -67.62000275
0 92160 -39.63997269 -66.55337524
0 69120 -39.85329819 -66.55337524
0 46080 -40.06662369 -66.55337524
0 322560 -37.50672531 -66.55337524
0 299520 -37.72005081 -66.55337524
0 276480 -37.93337631 -66.55337524
0 230400 -38.36002731 -66.55337524
0 23040 -40.27994919 -66.55337524
0 207360 -38.573349 -66.55337524
0 184320 -38.7866745 -66.55337524
0 161280 -39 -66.55337524
0 138240 -39.2133255 -66.55337524
0 115200 -39.426651 -66.55337524
0 0 -40.49327469 -66.55337524
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: GUI based Photorealistic Condor Scenery Tutorial - draft
The obvious difference is that Lurik's calculations use a larger pixel size.
If you subtract his upper left corner from the upper right corner, you get: 68.903259310-066.181719860 = 2.72153945 degrees width for 10 terragen tiles.
That means each terragen tile in the 10 row width is 2.72153945 / 10 = .272153945 degrees wide.
If you divide that width by 256 (the number of pixels per terragen tile):.272153945 / 256 = .0010631013476563 <--value for cells E24/E25
My value is smaller (0.0008333) and comes from the SRTM data. Thus, the difference between the two spreadsheets.
What I'm having difficulty figuring out is why my calibration points, which are CLOSER together would make distances on your flight planner to be FARTHER apart than Lurik's calculation. I would expect the opposite to be true. Are you SURE that you didn't accidentally use Lurik's calibration points in the flight planner example you posted?
Out of curiousity, what technique are you using to cut the imagery tiles and where are you getting the numbers to cut them from?
If you subtract his upper left corner from the upper right corner, you get: 68.903259310-066.181719860 = 2.72153945 degrees width for 10 terragen tiles.
That means each terragen tile in the 10 row width is 2.72153945 / 10 = .272153945 degrees wide.
If you divide that width by 256 (the number of pixels per terragen tile):.272153945 / 256 = .0010631013476563 <--value for cells E24/E25
My value is smaller (0.0008333) and comes from the SRTM data. Thus, the difference between the two spreadsheets.
What I'm having difficulty figuring out is why my calibration points, which are CLOSER together would make distances on your flight planner to be FARTHER apart than Lurik's calculation. I would expect the opposite to be true. Are you SURE that you didn't accidentally use Lurik's calibration points in the flight planner example you posted?
Out of curiousity, what technique are you using to cut the imagery tiles and where are you getting the numbers to cut them from?