PDA

View Full Version : Designing Airports - Tips and Tricks


12oclockhigh
12-08-2011, 08:13 AM
I don't know if there is anything similar to the intent of this thread. I would like to create a place for an on-going discussion of techniques used to create photo and 3D fields.

If you have a technique, tip or trick, please write about it here.

Try to keep the topic limited to this (Yeah Right!).

12oclockhigh
12-08-2011, 08:21 AM
One thing that puzzled me as I was setting up grass buffers at the edge of my new photo airfield was seeing where the buffers were and then hiding them.

You have to create a folder and put all the buffers into that folder...then use the following property to toggle hiding or displaying them; "Force Children to render to depth buffer". Toggling the folder's setting will turn on and off each individual object.

Some of the primitives (Cube, Cylinder, etc.) have their own similar render property, you can still use a folder to control a group of similar objects. Each objects "Render to Depth Buffer" property needs to be turned off in order to inherit the property from the folder.

Some of these objects are desired to be displayed on screen. For example, I use the cube primitive as a landing target in my heli fields, thus the need to set the property for individual objects.

12oclockhigh
12-08-2011, 08:25 AM
The maximum size that I used to be able to import was 5000 x 10000 pixels. The raw size of the picture I am using in the latest field is; 21,482 x 9,566. That is a huge jump and the field picture quality has really jumped.

What pano head, camera and software are you using for the photos?

12oclockhigh
12-14-2011, 07:50 AM
I guess that I am just talking to myself in here. I do think this topic belongs here.

I wish the depth buffer items allowed true sizing rather than scaling. For example; rather than having to put three each 3x3x0.3 wall buffers together you could just set the wall size at 9x3x0.3 or what ever dimensions you wish.

Same with the cube, and the house... I am sure that there are others. I don't know how hard that would be to accomplish.

td9cowboy
12-14-2011, 10:17 AM
You are wrong about this belonging here, it belongs in a sticky. I will be using this information to bring my local field into RF. That increase in resolution is awesome! It's paved and has taxiways right to the pits behind the paved flight line. You have to be on your game to stay on the taxiways, great taxi practice. The layout is better than any field in RF. I wish I could afford to have it professionally done, it's that good! I know, the driveways and parking in the overhead look like they were laid out by a wine o, I'm working on that too. :rolleyes: You're not alone here. I'm interested in every minute detail of the process and any tip that is offered up. The two circles on the first shot is the control line area. 440X 40 runway. There's even a good sized pond for float flying with a dock and shelter, but that's another pano.

12oclockhigh
12-14-2011, 02:28 PM
I have learned so much about shooting panoramic scenes. It really takes a nice pano head, tripod and camera to make such a picture. When it is done, it is awesome.

Don't forget the software to stitch things together. To do this right take a bit of time and lurning. :)

td9cowboy
12-14-2011, 09:29 PM
We have a little over a hundred members in the club. Most of them own a digital camera. I own an older Minolta 35mm SLR with an array of lenses and and a small Sony pocket size 12 megapixel digital. What am I looking for to get the best results? This needs to be a high quality low bucks operation. I can't justify dropping a grand on equipment for such a limited use. I'm assuming a high quality Digital SLR is going to get the nod.

jeffpn
12-14-2011, 09:50 PM
I bet the key is in that pano head. I bet my iPhone would do a decent job. I think a 12 megapixel point and shoot would do a fine job if we had someone who knew how to do it. I'll make Nooner a baloney sandwich lunch, you make him your finest chicken leg dinner, and we'll both treat him to the USAF museum?

phrank
12-14-2011, 09:58 PM
Well, if you can't find a pano rig locally, I can send you one of my Nodal Ninjas to borrow.
Looks like it could be a real nice field.

jeffpn
12-14-2011, 10:06 PM
It's a gorgeous field! But we can't tell KE that. They'll think we're biased. It's every bit as good as any photofield they've provided for us already. I did a mockup of it way back in G2. Built it out of 3D objects.

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 02:27 AM
That's a very generous offer to loan out the pano head Phrank, Thank you. I went to their website and they have a lot of helpful information there. This seems to be the key to the project. Since KE upped the resolution, I wonder if I make a high resolution pano it will only work in RF6 or the other versions as well? One more question for someone with RF experience. The pond has about a ten foot rise behind the dock I plan to shoot from. The shelter in the google earth shot is actually dug into the slope on the back side. Do you think that is going to cause any issues? I'm guessing it's forty five feet behind the dock. The terrain on the other side of the pond is flat.

phrank
12-15-2011, 02:39 AM
I've done a few fields where there are drops or uneven terrain with poor results.
There isn't really any hilltop capability to Photofields, and it is something that is really needed. (6.5 or Seven?) :p

Raised areas are fine.

Find a spot that is mainly flat.

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 02:45 AM
I should be good in both areas then,Thanks

jeffpn
12-15-2011, 07:18 AM
Wouldn't you want to shoot the pics from one of the pilot stations? That's where you stand when you fly. That's the perspective you'd want, isn't it?

willsonman
12-15-2011, 07:58 AM
Bill I assume you are doing a finer job of creating your field? Be sure to add the "dead" zone at the far right end of the runway... I would also suggest you place some "clover" patches in there too ;) a haha. good times. This is all great stuff.

SHOULD BE A STICKY.

12oclockhigh
12-15-2011, 09:08 AM
The new photo field is really awesome... incredible really.

I would like to know the maximum photo resolution...

I again want to mention to the KE people, the buffer primitives really need to be sizeable by individual dimensions, not just one size parameter.

Also need to take pano of a field on more than one occasion... morning, evening, summer, winter... this really makes you feel as if you are flying on your own field.
.
.

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 11:41 AM
Wow, I'm overwhelmed by the generosity and support by you guys from coast to coast across the US for this project. I am getting very excited about getting started with my education. The weather is going to be horrid here in OH for a few months and there will soon be a few fields surrounded by palm trees that will be local to me. There is one little ball field down there that I fly helis on that is a drop dead gorgeous to fly on. The far end of the field is surrounded by sea wall on two sides with an anchorage for sailboats and about a half mile of open blue sky as a backdrop across the bay. There is nothing behind the heli for it to blend in with. This would also make an excellent park flyer and heli field unlike anything we have in RF. Here's the ball field. The pilot spawn is home plate the heli spawn is a portable heli pad near the pitchers mound. The street view is not great but it kind of gives a better feel for the place. Not that I would post a field that I thought was less than perfect, but something like this may give me a little practice this winter before I get to the prize this spring. There are also a few AMA fields in the area that could be candidates. Sparks Field being the closest. I may have to rethink Phranks generous offer on the nodal loan. There are three fields that could be done at Wingmasters if I included the heli area.

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 12:25 PM
Nooner, where are your creations? Those would be helpful as a learning tool. I promise I won't fly on them. Ya right. ;)

Maj. Numbskully
12-15-2011, 12:49 PM
Nooner, where are your creations? ;)
I was wondering the same thing ! :confused: :confused:

jeffpn
12-15-2011, 12:57 PM
I think Nooner keeps his creations in the same place phrank keeps his. Wouldn't that be the mother lode if you could find it?!

phrank
12-15-2011, 01:06 PM
You want even MORE content? :eek:
There is no shortage of content at the swaps, you guys are doing a fine job. :p

We appreciate the hard work.

Maj. Numbskully
12-15-2011, 01:09 PM
As addicts .........We want the best crack phrank !

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 01:12 PM
Well, what do we have to do, pry them out of their cold dead hands?

jeffpn
12-15-2011, 01:17 PM
You're getting the best crack already! We just want as much crack as we can get!! :p

phrank
12-15-2011, 01:37 PM
Jeff is right, you are already getting the best crack.

Plus, there is a dirty little secret... :eek:

off topic... Photofields, yeah, we were talking about the old dude's Photofield. :D

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 01:44 PM
Actually, I just checked out Phranks files in his profile and he has shared some of his airport work. I have flown both in the past and they were very nice. I need to get those in 6 for a test flight. 2007 is when he shared them and also when I joined this site.

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 02:03 PM
So what do you guys think about the ball field. I haven't flown there in a couple years. It's a little used place but you'll notice a walking trail around the perimeter that sometimes can cause major delays if someone shows up and makes about ten laps. I quit flying there after that girl got hit in the head with a heli in a near by park a while back that of course made national news. It's a great spot though and there are no safety concerns in RF. I think I'm going to go out see what I can find in a pano head on the cheap. Do I need the leveling device or can leveling be done with a torpedo level on the cheap?

12oclockhigh
12-15-2011, 06:39 PM
I have been flying a much less than perfect panoramic picture for a couple of years. I have only had the Ninja for a couple of months now. It took me three photo shoots to get things nailed down. I got the unrestricted version of PTIGUI last week or so. So it is only recently that I have a really nice representation of my home field. I am in the process of adding all the depth buffers and other stuff now.

Like fine wine... it is aging.. I have lots of good ideas, but ideas are worthless without the time and effort it takes to bring to completion.

Nooner, where are your creations? Those would be helpful as a learning tool. I promise I won't fly on them. Ya right. ;)

td9cowboy
12-15-2011, 07:12 PM
I have been flying a much less than perfect panoramic picture for a couple of years. I have only had the Ninja for a couple of months now. It took me three photo shoots to get things nailed down. I got the unrestricted version of PTIGUI last week or so. So it is only recently that I have a really nice representation of my home field. I am in the process of adding all the depth buffers and other stuff now.

Like fine wine... it is aging.. I have lots of good ideas, but ideas are worthless without the time and effort it takes to bring to completion.
What was causing you problems on the first two shoots? Not enough overlap,lighting issues, focus?

12oclockhigh
12-15-2011, 07:16 PM
Parallax problems.... having the software try and stitch clear air space together. Number of rows, number of pictures to take. Time of day. Too much wind. Clouds passing too quickly. Too many people. I have had them all cause problems. It is not as easy as you think.

I found that if I took portrait photos with the top of the bottom row being the horizon, and the bottom of the top row being the horizon... the software did a good job of rotating and then stitching the images together and gave me 97.341% of what I needed.

What was causing you problems on the first two shoots? Not enough overlap,lighting issues, focus?

willsonman
12-15-2011, 09:04 PM
Too many people.
Yeah, because you have people filming an airplane flying into an outhouse! :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzBTtWjGx7Q
See time 1:45
Your field is busy though.

td9cowboy
12-16-2011, 08:13 PM
Those pano heads are a little pricey. What model of the Nodal Ninja are you guys using and was it sufficient?

12oclockhigh
12-17-2011, 06:15 PM
Here is what I am using...
http://www.nodalninja.com/products/panoheads/nodalninja3.html

Due to the fact that my camera does not mount directly under the lens center, I had to purchase a T-Adapter offset plate too. http://store.nodalninja.com/products/T-adapter-II-with-30mm-offset.html

I am using a Nikon S8100 camera.


Those pano heads are a little pricey. What model of the Nodal Ninja are you guys using and was it sufficient?

td9cowboy
12-18-2011, 02:25 PM
It looks like I have the same problem. The lug is offset about a half inch from the center of the lens. That will require the adapter? How many shots were required with your camera for one complete rotation (number of detentes)? Our cameras seem to be of a similar design. You can get the complete coverage with only two rows of shots in portrait mode top to bottom?

12oclockhigh
12-18-2011, 05:52 PM
I go every other detent.. or about 30 degrees per picture. 12 pictures per row. 2 rows. The lower row, I try to get the horizon at the very top of the picture. For the Upper row, I try to get the horizon at the bottom of the frame.

This seems to work for the stitching software. Very hard to stitch when all you have is blue sky. For my first work, I tried not to do a cloudy sky as they are moving constantly.

jeffpn
12-18-2011, 05:57 PM
How do you get the straight down shots? The USAF Museum from EP1 amazes me. I don't see any stitching. How'd they hide the tripod?

flexible
12-18-2011, 06:05 PM
He might do something like this, then a little PS.
(Here is what I am using...
http://www.nodalninja.com/products/...odalninja3.html )

Boof69
12-18-2011, 06:49 PM
How do you get the straight down shots? The USAF Museum from EP1 amazes me. I don't see any stitching. How'd they hide the tripod?
The position ismarked and the head allows the camera to swivel out away from the tripod but maintains the height. Then the tripod is moved so the camera looks straight down at the mark then the mark is moved so the shot can be taken.

td9cowboy
12-20-2011, 09:55 AM
I downloaded the trial stitching software yesterday and just attached my camera directly to the tripod with no ninja in the back yard. I learned a lot and I was able to get the back yard into RF. It's not perfect by any means, but I learned a lot. There are tons of stuff to run into in this tight space and it's quite a puzzle to piece together the primitives so you can't fly through stuff. My home field is surrounded by trees on three sides and will probably need a half mile of fifty foot tall wall. :eek:

jeffpn
12-20-2011, 09:56 AM
You know I'll do what I can to help you.

td9cowboy
12-20-2011, 10:27 AM
Thanks Jeff. Need a link to my shopping cart? :D

jeffpn
12-20-2011, 10:45 AM
What'd you say? My MicroCell must be acting up again! I can hardly hear you!!! :eek:

td9cowboy
12-20-2011, 11:42 AM
LOL. I kind of suspected that might happen. ;)

12oclockhigh
12-20-2011, 11:58 AM
Not telling you anything... but keeping the lenses nodal point constant is necessary to get rid of the blur. You never get the resolution right until you do that.

Of course, you can get something into Real Flight that will work. I just gave up on that after some lousy results.

td9cowboy
12-20-2011, 12:01 PM
When you first start the field there is no sign of a photo in the field in the overhead view. I assume I'll need to place a few trees at known distances from the pilot spawn to start the layout. Wouldn't it be cool to be able to overlay that Google overhead in there and orient and scale it as a template for the field. That would take all of the guess work out of it and produce a very accurate field.

td9cowboy
12-22-2011, 02:28 PM
I got the full version of ptgui this morning and the nodel ninja is in the brown truck. I managed to get a pano into RF of the wingmasters field without the ninga, it's got some errors but it's good enough to experiment with. The first thing that stood out was the scale was all wrong. I had done some measurements and place a few primitives around at known distances from the pilot spawn and they appear at about a quarter of the distance I was expecting to see. RF is too small or the pano is too big. Anyone know what's going on?

phrank
12-22-2011, 02:40 PM
Now you need to fiddle with your horizon.
If its too low aircraft will appear bigger and run out of runway or hit obstacles sooner.
Too high then the opposite.
Sometimes if you were not perfectly level while panning around, one end of the field will appear to be of different scale than the other.
Enough fiddling, you'll need to find a compromise if a reshoot is not possible.

Maj. Numbskully
12-22-2011, 02:49 PM
flexible I did not know you had a nodal ninja ....you should try our local park
I have a nice 12.1 MP camera I can lend if you need it

td9cowboy
12-22-2011, 02:53 PM
I can tilt the horrizon on two axis but I haven't found a setting to raise or lower (Zaxis) The stitching software does allow you to alter the horizon though.

jeffpn
12-22-2011, 03:02 PM
I've always heard the horizon needs to be exactly 1/2 way up the picture.

td9cowboy
12-22-2011, 03:08 PM
So far I can only tilt it in RF. I can't raise or lower.

phrank
12-22-2011, 03:13 PM
In a perfect world, yes the horizon should be exactly centered on a completely "flat" field.
Add landmark and terrain, then you need to play a bit up/down a few pixels since it will get confused as to where your center really is.
Stitching software isn't perfect and may add some skew to your pano.
I've often compiled a pano more than once trying different error thresholds with different results.
Unfortunately, what works for one pano field will not work for another, so be prepared to tweak you stitching software and deviate from defaults.

td9cowboy
12-22-2011, 04:21 PM
Thanks Phrank, I've got a lot to learn about all this stuff. I just couldn't wait to get something in the sim to try it out. It's pretty slow learning things just tweaking settings and seeing what changed. When I get the ninja and get a real good pano that doesn't require much input from me to stitch I'll experiment with the horrizon features in ptgui.

12oclockhigh
12-23-2011, 06:42 AM
You have to use photo editing software to move the horizon up or down to the middle of the picture.. you can use FREE Gimp (yes another free program) to do it. Just add to the frame size and move the whole picture content down if you need to, or add blank space at bottom if you need... keep a 2 to 1 ratio (width vs height or close) at all times.

That is why I take two rows of portrait pictures, one row the horizon is at the very top, and the other row the horizon is at the very bottom... It accomplishes three things with one at bat... 1) the horizon is centered, 2) it give the stitching software something consistent to stitch together, and 3) it takes far fewer pictures to shoot portrait. You just rotate in one step in ptgui. (not free)

You also need to investigate the camera, mine has a pano mode that keeps focal length and aperture the same throughout the sequence. You might have to use a manual mode to achieve the same effect.

td9cowboy
12-23-2011, 01:09 PM
You are able to get full coverage top to bottom with two rows or still need a straight up and straight down shot to complete the sphere?

Boof69
12-23-2011, 07:36 PM
Two rows of 6 shots. 30 degrees up and 30 degrees down. Zenith (Straight up) Nadere (Straight down) 14 shots total. That is if your using a narrower telephoto lens. Wider lens can be done with 1 row every 90 degrees one shot up one shot down, but the results are much lower resolution. The first method yields the best results for your purposes.

Maj. Numbskully
12-23-2011, 08:16 PM
6 shots! , with a narrow tele photo? , for a 360 ?...............something doesn't sound right !:confused: even if your shooting landscape vs. portrait
I usually need at least 6 for a 180 with a "normal" lens

phrank
12-23-2011, 08:32 PM
Exact number shots and rows highly depends on your camera lens! :D
A safe rule of thumb is to use 20-30% overlap between adjacent shots and rows.

A higher quality wide angle prime lens will allow you to take less rows/pics per row but at a huge $$cost$$.
Your point and shoot variety wide angle zoom setting can get you close, but the big disadvantage are the high chromatic and distortion at the edges of each shot.
The sweet spot for such a camera would be about 1/3 from widest angle.
That will make the quantity of shots higher.

Experiment and find what works for YOUR gear and you.

Your tripod legs and shadows can be photoshopped out, but the straight overhead shot must be taken right after your upper row if the clouds are moving.

Most importantly lock in your exposure settings if you have manual override.

td9cowboy
12-23-2011, 08:49 PM
This is all great stuff guys, thanks My camera is a 14MP point and shoot that I can lock everything but auto focus. It has 10x optical zoom. Using Phranks formula, on the next shoot I'll try 2 to 3x of zoom and see what happens. Ninga gets here Wednesday.

Maj. Numbskully
12-23-2011, 11:09 PM
I prefer the middle of the road ...a lens set to "Wide" t begins distort strait lines and can exaggerate parallax

A lens set to tele or slightly zoomed from what is considered Normal begins to compress the image .....making things further away in the back ground seem closer to an object in the fore ground than it actually is

what focal length is "normal" .... that depends on the format ( no I'm not referring to file type)

In the old days "format" referred to the size of the negative
a "normal" lens ...one that gives similar perspective as your eye (I'm not talking of field of view here) for a 35mm format camera it right around is 50mm
My medium format Hasselblad had a format or negative size of 2 1/4" x2 1/4" and it's "normal" lens was an 80mm

how are these numbers arrived @ that would take way more explanation than I planned on doing here .......basically it has to do with optics and whats known as the image circle

So to determine whats "normal" for a digital camera really depends on the size of its Image chip ...and that varies widely from camera to camera ....so there is not really a hard and fast answer to that question as there once was with film cameras
For my G9 I find , its in the middle of its zoom range


Hasselbald has/had a 2 1/4 (film) camera known as the SWc (Super Wide Camera) it has a Ziess lens that takes distortion -less pics at a normal perspective but has the same field of view as human eyes just under 180...... bonus is that it also "Sees just under 180 vertically too !....its the only camera in the world that can take a high res. wide angle distortion-less photo ..... in one shot.......... think about it ......thats a completely distortion less 360 pano in 4 shots ! :eek: if you scanned them into digital ....you could make perfect panos with any basic photo editor :D

Norton
12-23-2011, 11:17 PM
I've been playing around with pano's on and off for a while now. (not to successfully)

I'm sure if I took the time I'd pick pretty quick.

This is just a 360 degree horizontal shot set at 1/2 zoom. It took 12 photo's at this setting. You can see how many more it would take to make a whole sphere.

Just though people might like to see.

P.S. No Phrank, I haven't messed with the one I sent you yet. LOL.

Never enough time :(

Boof69
12-23-2011, 11:22 PM
This video is a good example of my suggestions. This guy gets good results from this setup. Also he uses the Nodal Ninja. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPSJ_wa0z00&feature=related

Maj. Numbskully
12-23-2011, 11:24 PM
Seems like your camera is like mine ...half way through the zoom appers to have a "normal perspective ....just because its "Zoomed" does not mean that it is actually telephoto....its just moved in from "wide"...I would stick with that setting
In the day I worried about cost of film and processing , taking Digi's is dirt cheap ....shoot away I say

Norton
12-23-2011, 11:28 PM
This video is a good example of my suggestions. This guy gets good results from this setup. Also he uses the Nodal Ninja. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPSJ_wa0z00&feature=related

Why isn't it that easy for me? :p

Boof69
12-23-2011, 11:35 PM
He did seem to know what he was doing. I think he's been at it a while.

Maj. Numbskully
12-23-2011, 11:37 PM
wait till you get the ninja ...it will be !
like I said about 6 shots for a 180

BTW ...I'd take 2 nadere shots 90 degrees of each other I'd also put a penny on the ground dead center of the tripod
so you'd have an accurate target when you move the tri-pod for those shots as well ;)

Boof69
12-23-2011, 11:48 PM
All good advise. :)

12oclockhigh
12-24-2011, 07:51 AM
I don't bother taking the zenith and nadir shots... I just photoshop that section of the picture. You hardly ever see the feet of the pilot, and the sky is usually very easy to clone.

The number of shots is all related to the lens being used. The hardest thing to do is to get the paralex and the aperture settings right.

Once you get your camera settings correct it is pretty easy.... then the problems become the weather, wind, sun and clouds. Some days are just not good for a shoot.

12oclockhigh
12-25-2011, 07:03 AM
obviously a serious miss-understanding of parallax... with each lens change (zooming lenses too) the len's nodal point can change. You adjust for parallax. If you don't adjust, the picture will be blurry.

See the nodal ninja website for information in adjusting for parallax that.

12oclockhigh
12-28-2011, 09:41 AM
I never made any statement that this thread was photo field only... post where ever you feel comfortable. I will focus on my thread.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 11:50 AM
obviously a serious miss-understanding of parallax... with each lens change (zooming lenses too) the len's nodal point can change. You adjust for parallax. If you don't adjust, the picture will be blurry.

See the nodal ninja website for information in adjusting for parallax that.
I'll say there is a miss understanding

Thats twice you've mentioned parallax and blurry as if one effects the other :confused:

They are 2 completely different things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other

As long as you have enough depth of field using a smaller aperture and the lens is focused properly
having the nodal point set incorrectly even after changing the lens or zoom setting will only give you parallax problems ......not blurriness
you'll still get sharp photos

Blurriness can only happen in one or more of the following situations
Slow Shutter Speed
Moving objects in the photo (relative to shutter speed)
Incorrect aperture setting
Incorrect focus setting
Camera movement/ shake
Dirty lens or film/chip plane
Dirty filter
Zooming during exposure
Panning during exposure
Extreme heat or cold
Condensation
Damaged lens
None have anything to do with the nodal point or parallax

Please post a link to the ninja site you referenced I found several and can't find anything mentioning the relation ship between the 2

I'll admit panos are not my strong point in photography
but everything I was taught tells me that parallax and image sharpness are 2 different animals
I'd like to see what the folks at nodal ninja are saying about that

Boof69
12-28-2011, 01:42 PM
It's my understanding that you first set the focal length you wish to use for the shot. Then move the camera forward or back along the top rail to adjust for parallax. The method for doing so seems simple enough. I agree with Maj. that blur and parallax are two different things.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 02:02 PM
What I want to know is how do you know when the nodal point is set correctly before you start shooting ?
As mentioned the nodal point can shift With the zoom setting and varies widely from lens to lens even ones that have the same focal length range
I would hope its not just trail and error with the ninja
once you determine where the nodal point is for a fixed focal length lens you dont really need a ninja ............you can easily make your own mount for a fraction of the cost
problem is camera and lens manufacturers dont mark where the nodal point is or even have any kind of documentation showing were it is .... at least they never used to

I saw once that theres a way to find the nodal point using a lazy Susan and some pencils ;) I'll have to look for that again

Boof69
12-28-2011, 02:19 PM
If you have an object close to the camera and one far away you can line them up on the right side of the frame. When you rotate the camera to the right they should be in the same alignment with one another. This effect can be demonstrated by holding your finger in front of you and aligning it with some vertical element like a door frame using one eye. Then turn your head from the neck you will see your finger and the door frame move in and out of alignment, but if you try to move your head around your open eye you can keep the two in alignment.
The lens you use and focal depth is set to preference first then the nodal point is found using the described method.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 02:31 PM
Guess my eye and my finger are dysfunctional :p

If thats all it is with the ninja then why do you need a $400+ camera mount ?
I could make one for less than $20
1 1/4 x 20 nut
1 1/4x20 bolt
a bubble level
A few washers ,
Rubber hose/pipe clamp
a couple scraps of wood and a router

TD9
If its just trail and error with the ninja .............
I'd send it back unopened if I were you and get out yer tools

your $ can be better spent elsewhere........JMO

Boof69
12-28-2011, 02:46 PM
All your getting is precision and ease of adjustability. The important piece to include in a home made rig is a rail that will allow you to move the camera forward and back.

The nodal point is not a physical tangible thing. It changes with focus and zoom and lens changes. I understand it to be the point within the lens where the image inverts.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 02:56 PM
Right thats what the nodal point is


Seems WAY overpriced
the example shown is crude
you could make one with a rail (hence the router)
more precision than one you can make is doubtful.... really

Boof69
12-28-2011, 03:07 PM
Agreed. I think one could be made at home for peanuts, but not everyone is good at that sort of thing. You could follow this tutorial. It's slightly less precise than using a Ninja. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znT-kzOXf-A

td9cowboy
12-28-2011, 03:17 PM
Mine is due any minute. It's my understanding that you first center the lens over the pivot by positioning the camera to look straight down at the pivot point from above. Then you rotate ninety degrees to horizontal and make the horizontal adjustments over the pivot point to eliminate the parrellax. That is done by positioning the camera so you have a vertical object in the foreground and another in close alignment in the distance. When you are free of parrellax there will be no shift of those two objects as you pan the camera from one side of the frame to the other. If the shift gets bigger, you adjusted the wrong way.

12oclockhigh
12-28-2011, 04:31 PM
Can we get back on topic? The topic is building airports in Real Flight.

Boof69
12-28-2011, 04:44 PM
I thought taking good pano images would be integral to designing APs. :confused: Sorry....I'm out. :)

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 05:00 PM
I was under the same impression :confused:

td9cowboy
12-28-2011, 05:50 PM
Which part of building an airport would you like us to discuss? Should we just skip this part about getting a good pano and move on? OR just move on period so you can focus this discussion on just the aspects that interest you?

phrank
12-28-2011, 05:52 PM
Nonsense aside, Yes, let's get back on topic. :)

Td9 what camera are you usin? Someone may have already posted the info you need.
In some cameras the center may be at the glass, the colored ring or somewhere else.
The actual distance may be so small that it will not affect your pano unless there are many nearby objects.
I've done some satisfactory panos without a tripod, and only my fat head as my pivot point. There is a bit of leeway depending on your desired outcome, such as testing if a site may make a good photofield candidate.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 06:06 PM
TD9 are you familiar with hyperfocal focusing?
Its a technique used to get maximum depth of field ( focusing a slr by eye is NOT the best way)
If not I'll explain it in a PM since the subject is presumed to be off topic ...or you can Google it ;)

td9cowboy
12-28-2011, 06:13 PM
I got the ninja Phrank. Camera is a Sony DSC-H55. I think I've got it set up. There is no shift in the image.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 06:16 PM
Never mind your camera does not have a depth of field scale so you could not use hyperfocal focusing anyhow

12oclockhigh
12-28-2011, 06:37 PM
Building a pano head is off topic. Some photography is necessary, but it is not a photography thread either. It was headed for the rocks, so I said something. This has the potential to be a great thread, but not if it turns into another talk thread.

There are lots of places to discuss photography... elsewhere on the web.

phrank
12-28-2011, 06:47 PM
I got the ninja Phrank. Camera is a Sony DSC-H55. I think I've got it set up. There is no shift in the image.

Excellent! Looking forward to your progress.
Once you get past the technicals, it is quite enjoyable.
You'll start looking for excuses to go out for a walk with your gear.

Just like the flying hobby.

... One last thing, it'll be easier if you get a remote shutter switch, minimizes handling of the gear once it's lined up.

jeffpn
12-28-2011, 07:05 PM
... One last thing, it'll be easier if you get a remote shutter switch, minimizes handling of the gear once it's lined up.
Using the self timer is a free alternative. ;)

td9cowboy
12-28-2011, 09:33 PM
I do have a two second timer I can set but it has to be set up before every shot. No way to turn it on once for all the shots. I'll experiment with that but moving clouds need to be captured quickly.

Maj. Numbskully
12-28-2011, 09:50 PM
As long as your shutter speed is above 1/60 of a second and you have a gentle touch it aint gonna matter

good Idea to weigh down the bottom of the tri-pod anyhow (I used a big lead fishing weight
cuts down shake and wind vibration ;)

dhk79
12-29-2011, 08:40 AM
I used a 8" shutter cable to take care of the issue of shutter release vibration.

Maj. Numbskully
12-29-2011, 08:51 PM
Back in the day I used one too ......
problem is most digi's don't have a shutter button that allows you to connect one :confused:

12oclockhigh
01-02-2012, 01:29 PM
The airport editor allows you to save an entire folder of objects... in fact you can save all the objects to a xxx.rfobjects file type.

Then when you want to use these objects in another airport, you can use the 'File', 'Load Folder' menu item to bring all the items into the currently edited airport. In my case, it is easy to have multiple versions of the same airport without rebuilding all of the objects each time.

It is my plan to have winter, spring, summer and fall versions of my home field. Also nice to have sunny day and overcast days (w/lots of wind) versions.

Using folders, really cuts down on the amount of work necessary to create new versions. Of course you can always just export the root folder and move items as necessary in the treeview structure.

12oclockhigh
01-24-2012, 08:42 AM
I love the red dot object used as helicopter landing points. I had a hard time locating it in the "Events" folder of the Objects Pallet.

Thus, my suggestion to KE would be to PLEASE add a search feature to the Objects Pallet. There are so many objects available there, it is becoming difficult to find what you are looking for.

If there are more than 100 selections, I think that it is time to consider some organization system... just grouping is not enough... an alpha search is in order.

12oclockhigh
02-08-2012, 08:03 PM
this entire thread is about making RF airports with a lot of emphasis on photo fields.

willsonman
02-08-2012, 10:45 PM
When do we get to see some of the work you have done with your new camera? I'd love to see what you've come up with for your field.

jeffpn
02-08-2012, 10:47 PM
Pass the popcorn, please!!

WDOGUY
05-14-2012, 07:35 PM
Trying to upload a airport I created of our local field but need the rfx g3x conversion tool. Looked up and down and still cannot find it. Also where in G5 is my creation. I know it's somewhere, just don't see my file.:(

John Hetzler
05-14-2012, 09:20 PM
I finally got the photos I took last September stitched into a 360x180 panorama. :D After struggling with Hugin and it's tools and being unsuccessful, I found the free Microsoft Image Compositing Editor (ICE) and it stitched the whole scene together in a few minutes! It took trial and error to get R6 to load the panorama image, starting at ~26,000x13,000 and ending up at ~6600x3300 without getting a memory error and then it loaded fine.
(The pano and raw images are here:
http://www.pbase.com/jghetzler/image/143320444 )

I used a Canon DSLR with auto-focus off, manual fixed exposure and fixed white balance at 28 mm focal length in vertical shots. As you can see, I cheated on the cloud-less sky and still need to fix that and the tripod shadow.

So, now I am in the airport editor and trying to add a simple object: the windsock. I want to add it to the photo approximately where the one is in the photo, but I am unable to get the photo and the edit objects in the main view. Is there a trick here? The trial-and-error method with dragging the windsock a little and using the pan camera is very slow and imprecise.

What steps do you guys typically do on a photo field? I'd like to set the photo field's position to the compass, but I don't know what or where in the picture RF uses as the north reference point. Then I can put the sun in for the proper shadows, right? Or is that just for 3D fields?

dhk79
05-15-2012, 07:02 AM
I am unable to get the photo and the edit objects in the main view. Is there a trick here?Yes, don't use the main view. Use the smaller perspective view for alignment (make it bigger if you need to). Then if you want, go back and edit the pano to remove the image of the object that you are replacing with a dynamic one. To just have an object that aircraft can smack into, use a depth buffer and leave the image as it is.

12oclockhigh
08-29-2012, 07:33 AM
Yep... this is the thread Jeff

opjose
08-29-2012, 01:00 PM
The airport editor allows you to save an entire folder of objects... in fact you can save all the objects to a xxx.rfobjects file type.

Then when you want to use these objects in another airport, you can use the 'File', 'Load Folder' menu item to bring all the items into the currently edited airport. In my case, it is easy to have multiple versions of the same airport without rebuilding all of the objects each time.

It is my plan to have winter, spring, summer and fall versions of my home field. Also nice to have sunny day and overcast days (w/lots of wind) versions.

Using folders, really cuts down on the amount of work necessary to create new versions. Of course you can always just export the root folder and move items as necessary in the treeview structure.

An important clarification to this since it seems many do not understand what is actually going on....

Saving the "folder" of objects does NOT actually save the objects themselves.

It merely creates and saves a list of 3D objects that are installed on your copy of Realflight, which includes Add-ons, Expansion Packs, and user created items...

This file merely lists the hiearchy and object placement data for those objects.

While this is a great convenience for someone working on an airport, you cannot use this technique to "give" other people 3D objects as some have attempted to do.

---

Also depending upon your original definitions, many objects will be "dropped" onto the current surface altitude when imported.

So if you've created a structure, etc. using carefully placed 3D objects... e.g. some in the air, some resting on other objects, etc... once you import the file, those objects will all be lying on the ground.

---

Another tip:

There is a parameter that forces a "conform to ground" placement of objects.... ALWAYS TURN THIS ON for anything you place unless you have an explicit need not to!

Failure to turn on "conform to ground" results in the object not resting on the ground and not being perpendicular to the terrain.

12oclockhigh
08-31-2012, 01:54 PM
I needed an electric wire to cause crashes on an airport that I am building...

I used the Sod Farm pole and sized it to 400% and changed the inclination to 89 degrees. I used a bunch of the objects to represent about 1/2 mile of electric line. If you use a larger size you can have less objects, but it will be a much bigger object when you are flying behind it.

I used the same object for the support poles. A wire collision object would be very useful. It is so cool when the wire causes a crash, just like it should.

Boof69
08-31-2012, 03:26 PM
This is what I have so far. How do you think this should be brought into the sim? Pole and lines as separate object or combined?

12oclockhigh
08-31-2012, 04:18 PM
Somewhere, I thought I saw some electrical/phone poles and wiring in another airport... thing is that my pano already has the items built into the photo... so I am looking for collision objects that don't render.

I do like the idea of more elect poles and such... maybe some high tension towers. Windmills that turn?? I am saying these items just because I have a use for them.

As a rendered object, I would have the pole and wire separate, that way any combination of the two could be created. One of the guys at our field had a plane hanging by the muffler on a hi tension line for months before it dropped. It just slid back and forth in the wind.


This is what I have so far. How do you think this should be brought into the sim? Pole and lines as separate object or combined?

Boof69
08-31-2012, 04:19 PM
How do I make them collision objects? Haven't made allot of AP items. I thought depth buffers are used for that purpose.

12oclockhigh
08-31-2012, 04:22 PM
yes depth buffers... same thing.

Boof69
08-31-2012, 04:26 PM
Does anyone know if there is a special way for me to import objects as "Depth Buffers"?

doug schluter
08-31-2012, 04:34 PM
[QUOTE=12oclockhigh;234349]Somewhere, I thought I saw some electrical/phone poles and wiring in another airport... thing is that my pano already has the items built into the photo... so I am looking for collision objects that don't render.

12oclockhigh
you can change objects to render as collision only in the AP editor , but i think you know that already just checking though 8)


doug

12oclockhigh
08-31-2012, 05:01 PM
Doug... I was going to test that theory... but I had not tried it. makes sense. KE: I sure wish we had a search feature on the objects. It is so hard to find things sometimes... I know I have said that before.

Remember folks... create a depth buffers folder and put all your non rendered objects in that folder. You can turn the render on one time at the folder object to place the objects and then turn it off the the folder level when you want a finished product.

The boneyard airport has a phone line group of poles. looks to be about twenty poles or so... double wires. Maybe that is the way to do it... less work for placing the object. 20 is a bit much though.

Maj. Numbskully
08-31-2012, 05:03 PM
You can make any imported static object a depth buffer ( known as Collision objects before G4.0 or 4.5)
by changing " Render to Depth Buffer Only" to YES ;);)

12oclockhigh
08-31-2012, 05:12 PM
One thing I have against using the object from the bone yard is that the poles will be at the wrong location for my panoramic photo. So when you fly under the wires in a clear location, bam you hit an invisible pole.

I am going to say... pole object and wire object would be best. That way you can place them as they would be at the photo site. You only need to place the poles and run one wire between the poles.

Boof69
08-31-2012, 11:09 PM
This is a 32 foot utility pole object and 200' of electrical lines. They are separate and the wire will come in at the correct height for the pole. Let me know if this works or not 12. I'm still shaky on AP objects.

12oclockhigh
09-01-2012, 07:33 AM
That works fantastic. I upsized it a bit to match the pano photo. The pole is great. This is much nicer because less of the view behind the "wires" is blocked.

My guess is that a "true" depth buffer/collision object is just an object painted orange. The orange is for placement ease.

This worked really great thanks... I am responding here so everyone knows. I will post this airport because I had help in a couple of days. It is the Kahl farm in Western Nebraska... great views for flying.

I am looking at adding wind generators as there are many on the horizon. Having those turning in the distance would be awesome.

doug schluter
09-01-2012, 05:30 PM
nice info on AP's guys , i'll grab your AP 12oclockhigh soon as it's on swaps 8 )

12oclockhigh
09-01-2012, 07:20 PM
OK I have the moving wind tower objects set for a couple of instances on the horizon.

I am going to photoshop the pano and remove the actual towers and place the models... really look good moving in the distance. There sure are a lot of them. The actual distance to the towers from my photo shoot point is about two miles. I am raising the wind mills up so I don't have such a huge airport... still they have to be too far away to fly back and forth to.

Awesome.

12oclockhigh
09-25-2012, 06:59 AM
Here is a good thread on "Environment" modeling.

12oclockhigh
10-01-2012, 07:45 AM
Are you having trouble with the field's picture and the computer generated content not quite sizing up together. Change the height of the spawn point to be the same as the height of the camera's nodal point when the panoramic picture was taken.

12oclockhigh
10-07-2012, 02:21 PM
I think that the depth buffers at the left end of the runway need a bit of work as they do not begin to match the panoramic picture...

Also they are new 6.5 objects and they do not operate like any other depth buffers and are hard to work with as they cannot be displayed.

csgill75
10-07-2012, 02:48 PM
I think that the depth buffers at the left end of the runway need a bit of work as they do not begin to match the panoramic picture...

Also they are new 6.5 objects and they do not operate like any other depth buffers and are hard to work with as they cannot be displayed.

Are you referring to how close the tree line is in relation to the end of the runway? Those trees could stand to be pushed back a couple hundred yards.

12oclockhigh
10-07-2012, 03:47 PM
Yes, that is easy enough to do... and so I went to do it, but the conifer object used is defective and cannot be made observable in the airport preview picture ... ahem cough weez "environment editor."

Are you referring to how close the tree line is in relation to the end of the runway? Those trees could stand to be pushed back a couple hundred yards.

12oclockhigh
01-08-2013, 08:18 AM
So you want to do a night photo field?? remember to set the sun inclination to less than zero. A value of -60 gives a bit of twilight. Of Course, you do need a panoramic picture shot at those lighting conditions.

12oclockhigh
01-09-2013, 10:34 AM
Depth Buffers and Collision Objects are the same thing. Ever wonder how the simulator knows to crash when it runs into an object in the panoramic picture. It is because the designer created a depth buffer (new designation) that is invisible but is solid when you crash into it.

It is discussed further in this thread: http://www.knifeedge.com/forums/showpost.php?p=244897&postcount=20

Making a folder to contain all your depth buffers allows each item in the folder to inherit the folders setting whether to display in orange or invisible. A neat trick is to drag and drop the pano picture. That way you can keep the pano window small and still see the area you are working on. When you are done, the overhead view in the editor should resemble the overhead view of the area shown in the pano. Sometimes the overhead shot helps you place the object quickly.

12oclockhigh
01-10-2013, 08:16 AM
Here is a good description of how to do this in your field.

http://www.knifeedge.com/forums/showpost.php?p=245009&postcount=6

Flare
01-14-2013, 11:35 AM
Right-Click on the folder you want to put a Folder in, and scelect Add Folder {Pic. 1}. Give the Folder a name (you can change it later), or see the properties window (these affect the objects inside) {Pic. 2}. With the folder scelected you can add objects in it, or drag object's into the folder {Pic. 3}. In picture 4 I have made the object 'Invisible'.

John Hetzler
02-19-2013, 12:05 AM
http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=116866db-5841-43bf-a75b-2e7639da75d0&m=false&i=0:0:0&c=0:0:0&z=486.948440582829&d=-1.21739940863074:-1.21983228756421:-1.20415918262731&p=0:0&t=False

See the above pano on Photosynth. I've got a dome with curved walls and ceiling. Any suggestions on how to do the depth buffers for this so it doesn't feel like a cube?

Too bad we can't also simulate the temperature in there. It was -2 outside and about 25 inside making it tough on the thumbs! At least there is no wind!

To make the walls feel like they are at the right distance, this was taken with a 50 mm lens, with 36 pictures @ 10 degrees each per rotation and a total of 256 shots. This was done with the homemade pano head from the link on this site, handheld shots for the zenith, top row, nadir and bottom row. The camera on the tripod was about 5 feet off the turf. It was stitched with Microsoft ICE. Not perfect, but good enough. I scaled it down to 8192x4096 for RF6.

Norton
02-19-2013, 12:33 AM
http://photosynth.net/view.aspx?cid=116866db-5841-43bf-a75b-2e7639da75d0&m=false&i=0:0:0&c=0:0:0&z=486.948440582829&d=-1.21739940863074:-1.21983228756421:-1.20415918262731&p=0:0&t=False

See the above pano on Photosynth. I've got a dome with curved walls and ceiling. Any suggestions on how to do the depth buffers for this so it doesn't feel like a cube?

Too bad we can't also simulate the temperature in there. It was -2 outside and about 25 inside making it tough on the thumbs! At least there is no wind!

To make the walls feel like they are at the right distance, this was taken with a 50 mm lens, with 36 pictures @ 10 degrees each per rotation and a total of 256 shots. This was done with the homemade pano head from the link on this site, handheld shots for the zenith, top row, nadir and bottom row. The camera on the tripod was about 5 feet off the turf. It was stitched with Microsoft ICE. Not perfect, but good enough. I scaled it down to 8192x4096 for RF6.

Expansion pack #2 has a similar field called E-Fest, I'm sure it could be done. I had or have a field just like yours somewhere? Could be on a back-up disk.

12oclockhigh
02-21-2013, 07:26 AM
I would try long walls stacked on top of one another and tilt them to form the arch. Just to try something... I created a large cylinder, rotated it 90 degrees and put half of it below ground. The spawn point was inside the cylinder. I found that I could fly through the cylinder wall and get out, but could not fly back. I got a minor disruption as I flew out of the cylinder.

I looked at the field mentioned above they have four armory roof scenery objects created to form the roof line perimeter of the building. The objects do not appear to be of use to your project and I don't know about the EP issues of reusing those and giving the field away.

Or you could ask and see if one of the modelers here would create an arch depth buffer airport object for you... you could enter the radius and length to generate your dome...


See the above pano on Photosynth. I've got a dome with curved walls and ceiling. Any suggestions on how to do the depth buffers for this so it doesn't feel like a cube?

12oclockhigh
03-12-2013, 07:59 PM
Radd's School of Rotary Flight talks about playing Helicopter Baseball.
I am going to tell you how to modify any field in the Real Flight simulator to add bases on the runway to use for "Baseball" practice.

Adding Red Dots to any flying field in Real Flight.

1) click on the 'Environment' menu item, select 'Edit xyz .... field" item to edit the airport.
2) When the Airport Editor opens select 'Objects' in the 'Folder Listing' window at the top left.
3) In the 'Object Pallet" form at the top right expand (by clicking on the plus sign in front of) 'Real Flight 6.5' (your version number may be different)
4) Scroll down in the 'Object Pallet' form until you see the 'Events' item node. Click on the plus sign to expand the selection.
5) scroll down until you see the 'Red Dot' object. double click on the object to add it to the airport.
6) you will see the object on the airport background overview which is a collection of all the objects. The red dot object will be highlighted. Move the dot where you want it placed.
7) you can click and drag on the picture inside the 'Pilot Spawn' form to find the object in the view. You can select objects in the top left form... by clicking on a pilot spawn you can find where the pilot is located and the click and move the Red Dot near the pilot.
8) I add like to add four objects, one for each baseball base, and move them in relationship to one another.
9) I like to change the size of the dot to 200% or 300% of the original size in the 'Properties' form at the lower left, the size used is left up to you.
10) I like to make the helicopter spawn point have the same coordinates as home plate.
11) when complete, I exit from the airport editor... and always Save the changes...
12) If you are making changes to a Real Flight standard airport, you will have to change the name a bit so it will save. You cannot save changes to the original...

Finally exit to Real Flight and enjoy the targets

You can also put tables and other objects on the airport to fly around.

12oclockhigh
04-30-2013, 06:42 AM
Perhaps the single biggest mistake in making photo fields is getting the horizon placed in the proper location. Too high or too low and the end user flying experiance will not feel right.

You have to experiment with the top and bottom of the photo... add (best) or remove part of the picture to get the horizon as close to the middle of the picture as possible.

The horizon is easy in an outdoor photo field... inside a bit more difficult. When I shoot an indoor field, I try to make a mental note of things that are exactly the same height at the camera lense (nodal point). Then I use those points as the horizon line. It takes 5 or 6 around the room to get it right.

I also try to take the panorama as close to pilot eye height as possible depending on the tripod (they get shaky) that I am using.

opjose
04-30-2013, 01:19 PM
Perhaps the single biggest mistake in making photo fields is getting the horizon placed in the proper location. Too high or too low and the end user flying experiance will not feel right.


Yup, some of the other sims ( cough * Phoenix * Clearview * cough ) do a TERRIBLE job at this. Even the default "professionally done" airfields in those sims are a joke in that respect.

Worst still the creator didn't bother double checking Pano "distance" from the viewer...

Getting the Pano lined up and sized properly takes a lot of trial and error, but is key to getting a good Pano Airfield in the sim.

12oclockhigh
04-30-2013, 03:40 PM
My current thinking is that the camera should be elevated to be as close to an average person's eye level as possible. 5'-6" or so... then get the pano placed with the horizon as close to mid point in height as possible. Seems to take a bit of the guessing out of things. I hate that trial and error part, but it is non-the-less. You just have to edit the pano.

I have done two fields that I am rather proud of and shot many more.

12oclockhigh
11-21-2013, 06:41 PM
I still do a lot of panoramas that never get turned into photo fields, but I sure like how nice everything turns out with a good panorama.

12oclockhigh
07-15-2014, 06:57 AM
I still think PTGUI is the best stitching software available. Maybe more of a learning curve, but it will do ANYTHING.

piperpilot0DA
09-08-2014, 11:31 PM
I completed the pano of my field with much success. I used the free version of PTGUI and got great results in RF7, of course I have the water marks. The horizon came out right, and the view of the aircraft at each end of the field is accurate. I tried to stitch the same pictures together in Hugin, (no watermarks) the pano is washed out in color, and the end result when placed in RF7 is the P-51 looks like a park flyer as it heads towards the end of the runway. Does anyone know what is going on?

opjose
09-09-2014, 12:04 PM
The wrong picture aspect or zoom ratio was used when the Pano was taken.

piperpilot0DA
09-11-2014, 03:19 PM
Do you do any work with Hugin? I used PTGUI and had no problem with creating the field in RF7. It just has the watermarks. I use 10000 x 5000 and other 2 to 1 ratios for both programs. Is there someone out there that might be able to run my pano through the paid version of PTGUI?

Maj. Numbskully
09-12-2014, 05:51 PM
Why not just remove tthe watermark i have the trial version but forget or rather never checked its EULA did you give up your copyright to the photographs by mearly running them through thier Lprogram...? Watermarks are to prevent copying matirial by twarting a clean repoduction FOR FINANCIAL GAIN And to protect the authers copyright +f source matirial

Maj. Numbskully
09-12-2014, 06:11 PM
You are the auther ! And as such OWN the source matirial.... I know what many here are thinking " but KE has a simular policy with KEMax...NO .....No they dont it is not the same thing as the end product can be only used within thier product and I BeLIEVEthey thereforre have the right to oversee that content i dont mean to put legalese launguage in KEs mouth but i belive its along those lines ....next up ..how to remove a water mark on,.....YOUR PHOTOs

Maj. Numbskully
09-12-2014, 06:33 PM
Got photoshop or Gimp (free and without any goofy restrictions or watermarking of your content ...google/DL)
Open your pano in either fore meantioned photo editor i use Photoshop and will explain using photoshop but gimp is VERY simular
Find the originaljpeg(s) that contain the water mark(s) in the pano
Open one (do all this one at a time) ...............

12oclockhigh
09-12-2014, 07:17 PM
Because it is called stealing.

Maj. Numbskully
09-12-2014, 07:31 PM
......
Hit "M" key to select the rectangle "marque" tool outline (left click/drag)the watermarked area
copy it
Open A COPY .....A COPY of the pano...give it a minute its big
Paste ...
.open the layers pallet (toolbar under "Windows"
Slide Opacity slder to about 70%
Right click choose "Free Transform"
Size using tabs at edges (right click for more transfom options) Position to cover watermark
Click on the top layer or hit check mark in toolbar to unlock transform tool
Retun opacity to 100% in the layers pallet
Lather rinse repeat until all watermarks are covered .....THEN.......go to "layers" in the toolbar select flatten image......"Save As" with a new or slightly altered name as as origanal pano .....done....reimport into RF ..save all Buffers /objects from old AP in folder and and put a copy of them in new pano viola !

Maj. Numbskully
09-12-2014, 07:38 PM
Steal my own copywriten matirial . I beg to differ is the OP making a finacial gain As RF can be considered an educational tool ....one could also argue under the fair use clause in copywrite law if labled as educational also in the coptwrite law..given my past proffesion as a photog i have a little more than just passing knowledge of copy write law ptgui can claim antyhing they wany in the eula buy what really matters oin the end is what can be leagaly iinforced in a court they are on thin ice claiming you gave up your copy write if you have made something with your own copywritten source matirial but never tried to make a financiial gain from it Especily if its educationaly related if you think its stealing ..then if i used the ptgui trial (I dontYou know i love canon photostitch but if I did you can call me a thief i dont mind .......im done and not gonna argue here

Maj. Numbskully
09-12-2014, 08:13 PM
Btw yo copywite a photo all you need to do is open PS open your photo under FILE in the oolbar select INFO and fill out the form it will be embeded in the file then claim its copyweitten at your URL and yer done its asimple as that

Maj. Numbskully
09-13-2014, 11:02 AM
Yet i notice you have not offered to do the same ........If I owned ptgui I would have offered to run it for him instead of bickering about stealing...let alone your last post....Really helpful arn't you 12,,,,
In fact if the Op shot it with a canon I suggest he try running them through canons photostitch Removing the watermark for educational purposes with out making a profit is a LEGAL lOOPHOLE in copyright law therefore it is NOT STEAELING ...i said before i 'm not gonna argue here...do you want them to close this thread ???

Maj. Numbskully
09-13-2014, 11:28 AM
I sill find it odd that many here consider you the resident expert of PI's
Yet you have not posted a single file good ,bad or indifferent ....this is after all a sharing community and you give nothing back..odd...Very Odd

Maj. Numbskully
09-14-2014, 12:09 PM
Thanks for the info...very telling... you dont post because KE can claim ownership ....and im the one who is stingy....got ya ...i get it now ...10-4 ....;)(heavy sigh)..have a nice day 12

piperpilot0DA
09-15-2014, 01:19 PM
Yet i notice you have not offered to do the same ........If I owned ptgui I would have offered to run it for him instead of bickering about stealing...let alone your last post....Really helpful arn't you 12,,,,
In fact if the Op shot it with a canon I suggest he try running them through canons photostitch Removing the watermark for educational purposes with out making a profit is a LEGAL lOOPHOLE in copyright law therefore it is NOT STEAELING ...i said before i 'm not gonna argue here...do you want them to close this thread ???

Maj, I did use a Canon camera, and I do have Photostitch. I tried the software but it does not seem to be able to stitch a 360-180 pano. I have tried all settings of merge and arrange, but it does not seem to work for me. Do you have knowledge to help me?

Maj. Numbskully
09-15-2014, 06:45 PM
Dont try to do oit in one piece

Try it in 2 or3 sections then run the section back throgh photo stitch again ...of course it should be set to do a "Marix" stitch

Another alternative is to run the completed canon photostitch sections through photo shop ....CS2 and above has a check mark box wiithin the stich tool to "Save As Layers".....this alows you the oportunity to manualy stitch it together usiing the "Transform" tool in the same way as described above any small areas that may need small adjustments can also be fixed in the same manner with the origanal source jpeg.......I always uncheck the "Snap to Grid .....I have used this teqnique before i started to use canons photo stich and have "created" desert panoamas that look flawless even when some of the photos used within the stich were taken months apart and miles away from the photo stiched next to it !!!

I am currently doing the same for a Rf photofield but im in the middle of a 3 part long distence move(central texas to southern texas to Oregon so it will be awhile before i can get back to it
When completed it will look like someplace that actually exists that in the real world does not......but yould never know it.....so far i have about a 180 H x220-240W section with a checker board useed to fillin the missing section that i ran through RF as is and so far looks AWESOME

Maj. Numbskully
09-15-2014, 07:21 PM
Always use COPIES to work with....copies of copies if need be I always have what I call a "Golden " master put away in anothe location just for safe keeping

Just before i took down and boxed my PC for the move i didcovered a web site by microsoft that i had no time to totaly explore where you can free of charge upload you photos and make "spin" type 360s (simular to the effect made famous in the "Matrix"movies ...Regular spherical 180x 360s ...."walk through" panos and a few more "new"ways of viewing pano type photos....not sure if you can only view them there... Or weather or not you can DL the finnished product but i thought i saw a reference to download a "viewer" to see them off site......like i said i stumbled across the site literally minutes before taking down my PC microsoft may want the right to share your work as i saw asection to look at others work ...so if you are a tightwad stingy person like me you may not want to try to find it i forget now what it was called but at the time i was goggleing free photostitcheds and viewers ...should not be o hard to find ....ptgui is not the only save all end all way to do things actually when i tried the pgui trial it could not do a few that canons did flawlessly on the first try i think the 100 spent by 12 has left him biased jmo

piperpilot0DA
10-20-2014, 09:12 AM
Major,

I used a program called AUTOSTITCH and finally got a useable Pano. I had to photoshop a sky to the pano though. The aircraft I use tend to look realistic on one end of the field, however, it does not "shrink" to a realistic size on the other end. Can you tell what is going wrong?

opjose
10-20-2014, 05:00 PM
See: Click me! (http://www.knifeedge.com/forums/showpost.php?p=260765&postcount=9)

piperpilot0DA
10-30-2014, 11:17 AM
OP, Thanks for all your help. If you look on the swap page, and search for Edgewood, you will see that I successfully completed the photofield. It was difficult and I don't know what I would have done without guidance from you and the others on the forum.

piperpilot0DA
10-30-2014, 04:51 PM
Having just completed my first photo field, I would like to put in my two cents for this forum. The key problem I had was stitching the photos to create the panograph image. I used professional gear and an expert photographer to take the photos. One of the things I would do differently is make sure that the pictures of the sky include the horizon (we just arbitrarily used 30 degrees) The stitching software had trouble stitching the clear blue sky. I tried two free on-line programs to stitch the pano, Hugin, and PTGUI. PTGUI did a great job of creating the pano, sky and all, however, the free version of PTGUI leaves thousands of watermarks on the finished product. Hugin had a problem stitching the sky and leveling the horizon. In the end, I used a program, AUTOSTITCH 64. Although it had problems stitching the clear blue sky, it did a great job stitching the ground and horizon. I used Photoshop to create a sky. My finished pano was 21,000x10,500.

Problems encountered were:
The pano horizon has to be level and in the middle (vertical) of the pano. If you see that the aircraft in Real Flight does not get smaller, or gets too small, as it heads away from center, then you need to change where the horizon is on the pano and re-import it into Real Flight.

The forum here was very helpful, but there is a lot of research needed to do a Photofield properly.

fancyfoam
12-02-2014, 03:00 PM
What is the easiest way to move or create an airport a long distance from any existing airports?
Mike

opjose
12-02-2014, 05:49 PM
What is the easiest way to move or create an airport a long distance from any existing airports?
Mike

Start a new thread and I'll reply.

fancyfoam
12-02-2014, 08:12 PM
Start a new thread and I'll reply.

I started one yesterday and it said it needs approved. Still have not seen it posted.
Mike

opjose
12-02-2014, 08:57 PM
Here's a short form answer to your question....

Click me! (http://www.knifeedge.com/forums/showthread.php?t=26622&highlight=export+hiearchy)

fancyfoam
12-02-2014, 10:36 PM
Thanks for the link. That partially answered my question. I am starting with a blank airport and want to move it. All i have figured out is to slowly drag the pilot spawn to a new location. Can i type in coordinates for the runway location or pilot spawn which ever is correct?
Mike

opjose
12-03-2014, 02:38 PM
If you are creating a new airport and are starting from scratch, your best bet is to open an existing airport.

Then use the "Walk" keys ( hit "W" to move forward, etc. ) and move your viewpoint to where you desire the new airport to be created.

You can "fly" to the destination, move at double, triple speed, etc. using the keyboard.

Once your virtual pilot is at his destination use the pull down dialog to create a NEW airport.

A new blank airport will be generated with a pilot and airplane spawn at the location you "walked" to.

fancyfoam
12-03-2014, 08:04 PM
Thank you. This is what i needed.
Mike

12oclockhigh
03-15-2015, 10:04 AM
tttrn

TKDBLKBELT
09-14-2015, 09:26 PM
I am new to this and I am in need of help and did not find any information on earlier posts.

I was able to import a panoramic photo successfully, but when I go to airports it is not there. When searching under program files on the pc its not there either. I did find them under documents. Should I relocate the files?

If anyone has any information on how to do this the right way it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

uncle twist
09-14-2015, 10:04 PM
I don`t if you`ve tried this or not, but when you import a custom field, you`ll need to go to "CUSTOM AIRPORTS OR FIELDS" (whichever it is) which you`ll find at the top of your airport list. Click on the "custom", you should get a menu that has your airport on it, if you`ve imported it correctly, Another thing to consider, yes you imported the file into your documents file, which is a good place for it, BUT, did you import that file INTO RF, if you did`nt do that, you won`t find it on your airport menu.

Ernie26507
04-14-2017, 08:18 PM
I new to this, I just bought the game last weekend and saw people make their own fields. I cant figure it out. Could you tell me how I can make one? Do I used just a photo or does it have to be like a 360 camera? Or is there a place I'm suppose to upload to?

12oclockhigh
04-17-2017, 06:19 PM
If you had read the thread that you posted in. (this thread) You would have received the information that you were looking for. It is plum chock full of information on creating photo fields.