When Photoreal has to Go

[Charl]

Got it...I had saved as DXT1 (no alpha) which wouldn't have helped my cause...this is the kind of stuff, that without mentoring, would take forever.
Thanks.
Mow the lawns at Pauanui, then...

[Charl]

The next logical step, then, is to Create Your Own.
I have no intention of becoming a FS scenery designer, sounds far too much like work!
However...
Maps2bgl is a little utility much like Tile Proxy, which pulls aerial imagary into the sim.
Unlike TP, it doesn't do it in real time, and so you get a series of bgl's and bmp's which create a photoreal image.



It seems to do this over a large area (3,500 tiles) by default, and my German isn't good enough to figure out if the boundaries can be adjusted.
I think not.
I want to use only the middle dozen tiles or so, re-textured and placed around an airstrip in the sim.



Being bgl-challenged, I know not which bgl's are appropriate, and if they can be used out of context, to describe only those tiles I need. (The bmp's are identified OK using Tcalc).

My question: How do I create the necessary bgl's, just for the area under consideration?

[toprob]

I have never used Maps2BGL, but I do get a lot of queries about it, so I've done some study, and I even have a separate bookmark folder for it:) That way, I can just steer people to the appropriate place.
It seems that you can restrict the output to a particular area --take a look here.
The steps seem to be:
Create a polygon in Google Earth to define the area you want, and save it as a KML file;
Open the KML file in Maps2BGL, and select the 'Borders with smaller resolution' option to confine the output.

Alternatively, you could create your own INF file and run it through resample.exe, discarding the resulting textures and replacing them with Maps2BGL output. Since I can't think of an easy way to do this, I'd try the above Google Earth technique first:)

Remember, though, that you can't distribute scenery made from this imagery, it is for personal use only.

[Charl]

QUOTE

Remember, though, that you can't distribute scenery made from this imagery, it is for personal use only.[/quote] what are you meaning goggle images into tiles ?,i thought ppls where aloud to as long as there is no profit ,and anyway they are that changed with colors and masking would it still matter then ?..

[Charl]

QUOTE (toprob @ May 10 2008, 11:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have never used Maps2BGL, but I do get a lot of queries about it, so I've done some study, and I even have a separate bookmark folder for it:) That way, I can just steer people to the appropriate place.
It seems that you can restrict the output to a particular area --take a look here.

Thanks for the link Robin, I missed something in initially selecting the smaller area, although I pretty well did what the manual says.
This is a very promising utility, for the limited kind of texture addons I want to do.

QUOTE (creator2003 @ May 10 2008, 12:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...What are you meaning, Google images into tiles?
I thought people were allowed to, as long as there is no profit?
And anyway, they are that changed with colors and masking, would it still matter then?...

You can't use any part of the original Google image as it is copyright.
My intention is to use the Google image as a template, and create my own textures, much as I did with NZNE and Parakai.

[toprob]

QUOTE (Charl @ May 10 2008, 01:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can't use any part of the original Google image as it is copyright.
My intention is to use the Google image as a template, and create my own textures, much as I did with NZNE and Parakai.

Yes, no matter what folk say about this, all the services, including Google, are very strict with their data. Many people try and interpret various bits to their benefit, but I wouldn't advise this:) Painting over it completely is acceptable, according to many, as long as none of the original image remains. Don't even try to apply 'artistic' copyright rules, regarding percentages of the original image, it won't work with Google.

Here's the relevant bit from Google Earth:

QUOTE

1. USE OF SOFTWARE
Subject to these Terms and Conditions, Google grants you a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the Software distributed with this Agreement during the term of this Agreement on a single designated computer. You may make one copy of the Software in machine-readable form for backup purposes only. The backup copy must include all copyright information contained on the original. Such license shall be, at Google's sole discretion, annual or monthly and is conditioned upon the receipt by Google or its authorized reseller of full payment for the Software but shall be terminable as provided in these Terms and Conditions. Your rights in the Software are limited to those expressly granted in this Section 1. Your rights in the Software do not cover any broadcast or media use without execution of a separate agreement with Google allowing you to do so. The geographical information made available for display using the Software is provided under a nonexclusive, non-transferable license for printing and use only by you. Any animations, movies, prints or screen outputs generated with the Software are for your use only. You may not use the Google Software in any manner that could damage, disable, overburden, or impair Google's services (e.g., you may not use the Google Software in an automated manner), nor may you use Software in any manner that could interfere with any other party's use and enjoyment of Google's services.[/quote]

They are quite specific about single-machine use, which many people have tried to re-interpret based on differing degree of silliness. And, really, you can't even use a tool like Map2BGL, as it represents an automated manner!

Last edited by toprob on Sat May 10, 2008 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[creator2003]

So how does that guy that released that Ardmore tile made with sbuilder and get away with it or is that a breach of copyright aswell , i know alot of the Voz addon freeware airports for ftx are made from alot of sbuilder files ,or is this a who cares type of thing ...
Its hard to get any images for tiles so google earth is like seventh heaven ,i really want to know as ive been using google and would like to know if all that sbuilderX work is rubbish because i cant release it ..

[greaneyr]

Probably going over old ground here, but where does google get their NZ imagery from? Saying aerial images come from google is like saying orange juice comes from a packet. Yes it does, but originally, it comes from oranges. The original imagery comes from various regional councils. The reason Google have to be protective of the data will be to do with the terms under which they have been granted permission to use the imagery supplied by the thousands of sources worldwide.

If we could cut to the chase and go straight to the source (eg the councils) we may have more joy.

[toprob]

QUOTE (greaneyr @ May 10 2008, 11:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Probably going over old ground here, but where does google get their NZ imagery from? Saying aerial images come from google is like saying orange juice comes from a packet. Yes it does, but originally, it comes from oranges. The original imagery comes from various regional councils. The reason Google have to be protective of the data will be to do with the terms under which they have been granted permission to use the imagery supplied by the thousands of sources worldwide.

If we could cut to the chase and go straight to the source (eg the councils) we may have more joy.

There's a lot to that, the main reason why Google is quite protective of its imagery is that it must have hundreds of different licence agreements to maintain. As you move around in Google Earth, you may get an idea of who owns the local imagery -- for instance, zoom in on NZAA and it shows as 'Copyright Auckland International Airport.'

The aerial I used for Paraparaumu came directly from the Kapiti Council, and I did need to sign an agreement to use it. Most councils would be willing to consider this, if they own their own imagery, but some have limited license agreements which may make this difficult. You can only ask. If they have a viewable GIS system online, they may be easier to approach, as they would already have the basis of third party licensing in place, and understand the implications of using the digital imagery.

The only problem I have is that most councils who own their own imagery have an implied agreement with their rate payers that it will only be paid for once -- and me selling it in the form of flightsim scenery may constitute selling it twice to the locals:) That's one of the reasons why Paraparaumu is freeware. The main reason why I don't yet have permission to use much of the local council imagery from throughout the country is that it isn't gonna make me any money, so the freeware developers may as well have it.

By the way, the Ardmore scenery doesn't appear to be based on Google imagery -- although it could just as easily be any of the online map sources. The scenery author doesn't mention the source, but just because he used SBuilder to obtain it, it doesn't mean that he didn't obtain permission to release it.

[Christian]

In regards to SBuilder and FTX freeware airports, no, you can't distribute this imagery as it is indeed copyrighted as explained above (unless of course you have a license). Why do people distribute it anyway? I guess it's a question of will google really come after FS freeware/payware designers?

[Charl]

I've had a number of emails asking about NZAA, which is a problem airport becasue the photoreal runway image doesn't line up with any of the available airport scenery.
I wasn't going to do this just for myself, and I did have doubts about the ethics of releasing a modded payware product (RealNZ) based (I assume) on proprietary material.
But in reality, who is going to gripe? I reckon if Robin can wear it, nobody suffers prejudice, and it might be a nice thing to have.
So here's a WIP, it amounts to painting out the runway area background:



and I'll release it in due course unless there is a chorus of Don't Do It!

[Ian Warren]

So many ways to get airport ground texture to look good when finished , i been down this road before, it s good to make it suit you airport and models , it and the time to finish a complete before a new version of FS , even if it is Google , the res is to low , and if a good artist or interprate photo can regenerate the area , little at a time , that has changed with paint and draw still requires time , all this copy-write ... umm yeah , own private use ... your own photo librairy , to others that helped and with your my photos .... guess to many rules .. rule no. 1 ..... forget what others say ..... JUST Do IT

[Timmo]

QUOTE

rule no. 1 ..... forget what others say ..... JUST Do IT[/quote]
Yeah sounds good to me its our earth anyway and they are making money off something we are all given for free ,and its not like we are making any money off it in the first place ,,im sick of the rulz this rulz that just do it and worry later in this case if it ever comes down to it ill be the first to kick up a storm of BS copyright well i copyright the trees the sea the earth and the solar system and every thing i see is all mine...lol what a bunch of bull

this is our world and this is just getting to much when they say its theres and the make billions of something thats really free to all to have a look at ,ive seen mars this week didnt have to pay a cent for it ,thanks NASA

[Timmo]

Nope I disagree with you- There is a significant cost involved in obtaining aerial imagery and it is up to the purchaser/owner of that imagery what they want to do with it. Google isnt a charity.

No one is disputing that being able to 'see' is a free right or the things represented in the imagery dont belong to Google etc....but being able to get to that location (i.e. Hire a plane or a satellite) and capture and process and store and distribute costs money. That is not free. That is what they are selling.

You are welcome to prove me wrong by going and creating your own new aerial photography for free though

Drive to the airport. $$
Hire a plane $$
Hire a pilot $$
Hire an aerial camera $$
Fly the capture mission $$
Optimise/process/georeference the imagery $$$$$$$$$
maintain the servers that provide the imagery $$$$$$
pay the staff that maintain the servers that provide the imagery $$$$$$$$
etc etc

and then give it to me for nothing? Have a Tui.

What you are doing Charl is a bit different though....

[Ian Warren]

"significant cost involved in obtaining aerial imagery " and a lotta discomfort , to the aircrew , their MOTTO JUST DO IT

[Charl]

QUOTE (Timmo @ Jun 7 2008, 01:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What you are doing Charl is a bit different though....

Yes I'm not infringing any copyright in creating (as opposed to copying from elsewhere) replacement textures.
Still it just seems like good manners to ask before you barge in on someone else's work.

[creator2003]

Isnt it mostly the govt that asks and pays for this service ,and being i pay taxes should that be ours in one way or another ,i mean we even fund the rates and other things around here or did someone else do all this work and sell it to nz then we have to pay for it again when we want to use it ,sounds lke someones making lots of money out of all of us ,but we already knew that aye ..lol we even pay for there 300.000 plus wages and BMWs ,what a circle of BS

who takes this stuff"photos" and who pays for it ?how does it work ?when you get your stuff from the councils who is paying for that and how does it end up in goggle ?

EDIT :I understand some of it and i do realise that it is this way just dont like it and would like more info

[Timmo]

QUOTE

Isnt it mostly the govt that asks and pays for this service[/quote]

Not really. While govt is one customer, the money sits in industries that need spatial data. Maps and spatial data are relevant in stacks of industries, the demand is so high that a commercial industry has grown around mapping and aerial photography.

QUOTE

who takes this stuff"photos" and who pays for it ?[/quote]

Mostly private companies. As Timmo explained capturing photography is very expensive. The other alternative is satellite imagery, of course also expensive (ie the satellite, launch + maintaining it). On top of that it's not just the capture, but the processing which also cost lots and lots.

There a zillions of private companies which do that sort of stuff and it's their bread and butter.

QUOTE

how does it work ?when you get your stuff from the councils who is paying for that and how does it end up in goggle ?[/quote]

Council data won't end up in google. Googles data is all commercial and owned by commercial companies. Google has a license agreement with individual companies which let Google Earth use the imagery - on the condition that it's for viewing only. Who pays for the imagery - as explained above, private companies. None of your tax money sits in Google Earth. How can google do this for free? They don't. Their market are people/developers who need the commercial Google Earth license. The cut-down free google earth version is just clever marketing.

I think the how and why is not really relevant. Is it ok to use google imagery as your backdrop for freeware airports? Well, I believe everyone has to decide that for themselves.

Christian

Last edited by Christian on Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Christian

Forum Addict

 

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:03 pm

Posts: 426

Location: melbourne

• Website

Top

[creator2003]

Cheers Christian thanks for the time and effort to explain this to me and some others ,freeware seems to be ok i suppose and i can fully live with that just seems a waste not to use such a good asset with FSX ..

[Timmo]

A slight correction Christian- Council data will/is end up in google (see the new photography in googlemaps/earth around Coromandel airport supplied by TCDC....wish I had had that 3 months ago!).

When I was working at Environment BOP we actually approached Google to see if they wanted our imagery- It seemed like a win-win situation as the alternate methods to serve up our imagery were expensive and slow (i.e. using ESRI ArcServer or IMS). Licensing it to Google would allow ratepayers to use and view their imagery without having to come into the office and bug us! (which took up a large portion of our time and cost the ratepayers extra for our time and printing costs). Unfortunately, back then there wasnt the NZ version of Google maps and they were only accepting American data...looks like this has changed.

HOWEVER....and this is a large caveat, the licensing for accessing that data through Google is still valid! Why? Because, the public, for the most part are dumba$$es- They dont understand proper use of geographical data (i.e. "hey on this map that I zoomed in on to 1:100, the property boundary goes through my neighbours tree....therefore it's mine") and the owner of the data (i.e. council) needs to maintain knowledge of who is using their data and the implications of that (i.e. do they understand the limitations of it? Are they aware of the spatial accuracy? Are they aware of the spatial accuracy of any other data they are overlaying/analysing etc)
So, its a case of LOOK but dont USE...because if you can/do use it you may do something with it that it isnt designed to do and then try and blame us OR you may make money off it without Councils blessing.