Quote:
Originally Posted by Ekar
Great update Oleg, thanks! 
Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but for me- the main difference between the SOW terrain here and the landscape photos which have been shown in this thread, is that in the SOW shots there seems to be a lot (ie, too much) textural variation going on between each field- basically, from one field to the next, there is a difference in vegetation. In the photos on the other hand, you have quite a bit of uniformity across fields, which is broken up by variations in vegetation in different spots. The SOW terrain looks quite 'busy', while the photos look more placid or relaxed, to put it another way.
That's my only 'criticism' here, if you could call it that. On the positive side, it's great to see really nice resolution in the ground details.
Looking forward to purchase day Oleg- I'm sure you are too! 
thanks again for the update |
We used photos from the air and space for the august-september time of the year exactly for modeling our set of textures.
They are not exact textures. But using as a reference professional photos, accessble info for locations of vegetables, rural zones, etc
Yes it is isn't exactly satellite map... but we should model 1940...
Direct satellite maps would be good for modern sims... however they should too much reworked in term to clean from all the objects, like cars on the roads, etc. Also they should be reworked in colors, contrast, etc because from the space they are looking not like on the ground or even not like from 10 km altitude.
So.. we really doing better than some offers.
10-16-2010, 02:24 PM
Threaded Mode