Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Hi-jack24]

Is there any FREE site or program where i can download 2048 or bigger resolution satelite images for map textures??

I used flashearth for 1024_1024 res textures but since we have the ability to make 2048 why not.

Thank in advance!!
 

Jack

[farang65]

Hi there Stanger knows of a program for HD images.

not sure if the program is for the size you want.

you may have to pay for the program for ultra HD images

Universal Maps Downloader 6.71 is the latest 

Cheers

Kirby

[Hi-jack24]

Thanks Kirby! I've already found this tool via Stangers posts but that version costs 60 bucks...
But this version seems free I will give it a try later hope it works...

Thanks again!

Jack

[Herra Tohtori]

Not really sure you actually want satellite images. Aerial photography is probably what you want...


If you actually do want satellite images, NASA has full coverage of earth available on their Blue Marble pages, you can find downloads for the full Earth in eight blocks, each having 21600² resolution, and the full texture applied to a sphere would be sized 86400x43200, which comes to about 10.4 GB of data with 24 bits per pixel.

As far as actual surface resolution goes, this texture features 500 metres per pixel accuracy, which isn't exactly enough for flight sim purposes. There are satellite images of better surface resolution, obviously, but they often have false colours or things you don't want in terrain texture - such as clouds.

I believe NASA's WorldWind software uses these images as source data.

Aerial photos are probably better source material for the surface textures.


However, NASA's Blue Marble resources could be very helpful in creating the height map, since they also provide height maps of the earth at same resolution...

http://visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=73934


How big are the map_H files? As in, what kind of resolution can they be and what kind of surface resolution (say, pixels per kilometre) can be used?

[carsmaster]

How big are the map_H files? As in, what kind of resolution can they be and what kind of surface resolution (say, pixels per kilometre) can be used?

1pix in map_H = 200 meter
1pix in map_C = 50 meter

For example by default Net1summer map has the map_H file of 256x256 pix in size

[Herra Tohtori]

Hmm, that's interesting. I need to look into making a sample map...

Is there a maximum limit to the dimensions of these maps? Or in other words, if map_H has 200 metres per pixel, a 1024² sized texture would result in a 204.8 km wide and tall map, but then the map_C would have to be a massive 4096² resolution...

Another question - how high can the tallest mountains be? As in, if you put white area in map_H, how far from the sea level would it be? For example... would it be possible to make a Himalayas map with Mount Everest peaking at 8,848 metres?

Wouldn't THAT be a nice challenging environment to fly in... 

[farang65]

Hi There ,

Can't recall the exact hieght for the game concerning its cut off point.

As an example if you map the Himalyas most tops are cut off and they are all flat tops.

one of the problems with the game.

looks quite horrible I'm afraid

Kirby

[vpmedia]

You can scroll in Google Earth.

I mean you can put together or montage those screens into a 4098 texture if you want...plus you also need to make them tileable so you cant avoid Photoshop editing.

Btw I often wondered that if copyright would be enforced related to Google images how many people would have been able to create their own tileable map textures from scratch.

[Hi-jack24]

Hmm, that's interesting. I need to look into making a sample map...

Is there a maximum limit to the dimensions of these maps? Or in other words, if map_H has 200 metres per pixel, a 1024² sized texture would result in a 204.8 km wide and tall map, but then the map_C would have to be a massive 4096² resolution...

Another question - how high can the tallest mountains be? As in, if you put white area in map_H, how far from the sea level would it be? For example... would it be possible to make a Himalayas map with Mount Everest peaking at 8,848 metres?

Wouldn't THAT be a nice challenging environment to fly in...

Refering to KevinP's 2011 mapmaking Tutorial v4.:

"The largest map I have been able to make is 19040x14880 pixels (952Km x 744Km). Redwulf_32 says that in
theory the largest map possible is 3276.8Km square."

 "The maximum height it goes to is 4032 metres, so it's not possible to have a map of the himalayas
because they are well over 4000 metres high (unless you cheat)."

Cheers Jack

[Herra Tohtori]

Thanks, I'll need to select a less elevated area then - or use 50% scaling.

vpmedia, I am pretty sure that woyld fall within Fair Use of copyrighted material as a derivative work, furthermore the original's market value is not affected by use in IL-2... and if some copyright troll/vulture can really show that their image was used as part of an edited terrain texture, and choses to pursue copyright claims on it, I think that will be only because of the army of Chinese people hired to sift through everything on the Internet, each having a particular reference image to look for... and if all else fails you can claim that using the texture in IL-2 is a parody (at least as much as they are making a parody out of copyright laws).

[Herra Tohtori]

Ugh. I looked into the elevation/RGB values in the map making tutorial and I was shocked and dismayed to discover how ridiculous the system really is.



Problem 1. Elevation mapping is not linear - this could be dealt with, and I understand it's important to have better precision on lower elevations (8 bit depth is a serious limitation for height maps).

Problem 2. Elevation mapping is non-continuous - this is a massive inconvenience and probably responsible for most of the sharp angles in mountains that we know IL-2 inevitably causes.

I guess it would be possible to invert the function and use that to create a height map that has continuous progression up to highest mountain tops, but off the top of my head I can't really think of how to do that. Most height map source data assumes linear progression from sea level to highest peak.

I will keep looking into this...