![]() |
||||
![]() |
||||
![]() |
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
: Here's some alternate screenshots I took, in case you prefer these.
: http://imgur.com/a/mFG9X
: First is rendering normally. Second with atmospheric fog disabled. Fourth is
: wireframe (just for fun), and the third is some weird thing that HCE's
: screenshot functionality sometimes does. After that I just had some fun
: taking screenshots. The last two are the original screenshots I took.
: Something to note is that since you're not really supposed to ever be that
: high up above b30, it doesn't render everything properly. The lefthand
: side in particular is missing a bunch of scenery, including dark spots
: where rocks should be.
Whoa, thanks a lot. Shots without fog are going to be best, so let's concentrate on those. There are two ways I could produce a final image.
(1) I could make an image based on shot 2 of your new set. As you point out, some features are missing. But I could add them using overhead views from lower down. You've already provided some lower views, but it would help if I had more, and ideally with the same camera orientation as in shot 2.
(2) More ambitious, I could potentially make a higher res image by blending low-level views. Basically I'd build it up by using the centralmost parts of the views (where the camera is most directly overhead). I'm not sure exactly how the shot taking is done, but if the camera is pointing vertically down and you can keep it at constant height, I'm thinking that you could take a shot, shift the camera along a bit, take a shot, shift along a bit, and so on. If that's done with heavy overlap (like, each shot overlapping the previous one by about half its area), and covering the entire area of course, I might be able to make a nice image with no joins showing. I'd certainly like to give it a try anyway, if either yourself or anyone else can provide the source material.
By the way, in that shot 2, is north up?
| Higher res of SC overhead? | Rockslider | 1/17/17 3:12 am |
| Oops, meant to reply to Stretchy | Rockslider | 1/17/17 3:17 am |
| Re: Oops, meant to reply to Stretchy | Stretchy | 1/17/17 12:20 pm |
| Re: Oops, meant to reply to Stretchy | Rockslider | 1/17/17 4:26 pm |
| Re: Higher res of SC overhead? | ArteenEsben | 1/18/17 8:23 pm |
| Re: Higher res of SC overhead? | Rockslider | 1/19/17 4:16 am |
| Re: Higher res of SC overhead? | ArteenEsben | 1/19/17 10:24 am |
| Re: Higher res of SC overhead? | Rockslider | 1/19/17 1:06 pm |
| Re: Higher res of SC overhead? | Rockslider | 1/26/17 5:42 am |