How well rendered are fjord cliffs?

[dresoccer4]

In flying the other DCS maps I know cliffs have not been a strong suit of the franchise. Having near-vertical terrain projections with high resolution DEM has always been a dream of mine in DCS. 

With the Kola map being vastly populated by fjords IRL, I'm wondering if this is a thing with this Orbx map? Anyone have first hand experience of how good the terrain resolution is when it comes to the DEM?

(when I think of Norway)

Edited May 5, 2024 by dresoccer4

[Qcumber]

I would describe the fjord cliffs as a good artistic rendition rather than photorealistic. It captures the essence of the lighting and textures. Overall better than Caucasus. I am hoping that the textures will improve when this part of the map becomes high res. Where it is really let down is the transition with the water. 

[dresoccer4]

1 minute ago, Qcumber said:

I would describe the fjord cliffs as a good artistic rendition rather than photorealistic. It captures the essence of the lighting and textures. Overall better than Caucasus. I am hoping that the textures will improve when this part of the map becomes high res. Where it is really let down is the transition with the water. 

appreciate the feedback! i know the main high-res area is more to the East at the moment so I agree we can hope for better mountain/fjord renditions later on after some updates. what sort of water transitions do you mean?

[Qcumber]

2 minutes ago, dresoccer4 said:

appreciate the feedback! i know the main high-res area is more to the East at the moment so I agree we can hope for better mountain/fjord renditions later on after some updates. what sort of water transitions do you mean?

It’s the common one with DCS where there is a sharp edge which looks unnatural. I am hoping that DCs will work on this and that Orbx will further this with the higher res update. I really like the west coast of this map so far. It’s great for low level strike missions. TG Maverick, 633 squadron, Beggar’s Canyon etc. 

[yngvef]

Keep in mind that the very steep fjords that most tourists know are in the south-west of the country (outside the Kola map). Fjords in northern Norway are usually not as extreme as Sognefjorden and Lysefjorden (with the famous "Pulpit Rock") for example. Northern Norway has more U-shaped valleys (and fjords). Still steep, but different.

[Gunfreak]

3 minutes ago, yngvef said:

Keep in mind that the very steep fjords that most tourists know are in the south-west of the country (outside the Kola map). Fjords in northern Norway are usually not as extreme as Sognefjorden and Lysefjorden (with the famous "Pulpit Rock") for example. Northern Norway has more U-shaped valleys (and fjords). Still steep, but different.

Very true, most of the mountains up north are more eroded and so the hight around the fjords are lower.

[unknown]

2 pics from northern norway(same place, 2 views), this is from the "low-res" part of the map, so texture resolution will probably increase after that part was finished.

null

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Video idea...

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

 

[Oceandar]

In flying the other DCS maps I know cliffs have not been a strong suit of the franchise. Having near-vertical terrain projections with high resolution DEM has always been a dream of mine in DCS. 
With the Kola map being vastly populated by fjords IRL, I'm wondering if this is a thing with this Orbx map? Anyone have first hand experience of how good the terrain resolution is when it comes to the DEM?
(when I think of Norway)

Thats beautiful picture made me want to visit Norway. I hope someday....

[SibHan]

To clear this up a bit, having been living in Northern-Norway most of my life, Im glad to say that the shape of the mountains in the Kola map is spot on regarding their shape, so good in fact that it is possible to recognise places from the shape of the mountains alone. Textures can of course improve, but will wait and see how things develop.

 

[jurinko]

This rocky island caught my eye and was the first place I headed to after Bodo take-off. Pity that Molde area is not on the map (great fishing experience and famous King's Molde tree).
Do you think textures will be further improved in the West? I though higher res means better collated cities and airbases, not textures.
Now they look good from some altitude. 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

I have found some more cliffs, most of them leading to no settlement of any sort. Just for fun, DCS is never a sight-seeing sim BTW.

[Holger Sandmann]

FYI, we do have access to very high-resolution (1-m to 2-m) LiDAR based elevation data for almost all areas of DCS: Kola.
However, overall vertex density (= the number of triangles generated from the raster source data) directly impacts the size of the main surface mesh file, which, with Kola, is already the biggest in all of DCS land, I believe. That's because all of the thousands of lakes, and detailed shorelines, get embedded into that mesh file as well, something other maps don't have a lot of to worry about.
We've already integrated some very clever tweaks in the processing stages but hope to do even better in the future.

[markturner1960]

Hi Holger, I wish that you would make available a “hires” version for those of us who don’t mind the space it would take. The map has great potential but currently let down ( as are all the DCS maps) by this lack of detail. I would also be happy to pay more for this. There are a significant number of users who have the storage space and computing power to run a more demanding version…….Or maybe consider splitting off the western area with the lakes and fjord cliffs as a sepately available hi res package? 
 

The other area that would benefit greatly from improvement is the transitions between texture variations…….. it really kills the effect when there is this terrible obvious demarcation line. Is it not possible to do a blend texture to avoid this? 

Edited May 11, 2024 by markturner1960

[markturner1960]

On 5/7/2024 at 4:57 PM, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

I have found some more cliffs, most of them leading to no settlement of any sort. Just for fun, DCS is never a sight-seeing sim BTW.

It's not about it being a sightseeing trip, its about having the immersion and belief of a simulated reality interrupted or suspended by poorly implemented scenery features.....

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

I get what you mean. Unfortunately, in my setup, flying in VR means I do not take the graphics in the first place. Let's hope the map gets better. This is my favourite European map so far.

Update: I have found some more cliffs in Norway and make a video:

Sorry, still no match against the photo on the top.

Edited May 12, 2024 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[dresoccer4]

On 5/8/2024 at 1:10 AM, Holger Sandmann said:

FYI, we do have access to very high-resolution (1-m to 2-m) LiDAR based elevation data for almost all areas of DCS: Kola.
However, overall vertex density (= the number of triangles generated from the raster source data) directly impacts the size of the main surface mesh file, which, with Kola, is already the biggest in all of DCS land, I believe. That's because all of the thousands of lakes, and detailed shorelines, get embedded into that mesh file as well, something other maps don't have a lot of to worry about.
We've already integrated some very clever tweaks in the processing stages but hope to do even better in the future.

OP here. thanks for the feedback, really loving the map and looking forward to what you'll in the future with it and the updates you'll bring.