Okay... for some weird reason, working on the Ozark Lines/ES&NA has me fired up to see where I was at with the Colorado Midland route. (Go figure?? )

As with both route projects, Victorian city textures are needed. Found a "target rich enviornment" for that need... so all in good time.

BUT... was taking a second look at the DEM's used on the CM.

To make a long story short, with the input of Master Route Builder and DEM/DEMEX Guru Charlie Leveritt, I have installed NED 1/3 Sec (i.e. 10 meter) Seamless into the CM.

It isn't without its foibles (need to make some height/etc adjustments), but it has been done and looks "do-able".

BUT... question is: Is it worth it? The higher detail may/may not cost a bit of FPS, though I haven't done any real "testing" of that. However, is the visual difference noticable and if so, worth while?

Below you'll find screen pics of the same general area, one uses the older 30 meter SDTS DEM's and the other the new NED 1/3 Sec (10m) Seamless. (Note: Distant Mountains is turned off in pic "B". Sorry.)

Which is the 30m SDTS and which is the 10m Seamless? Can you see a noticable and sizable difference... or what?

Input please!

Well, there is a noticeable difference but then again, I have a pretty nice PC. As far as which one should you use? I'm not sure the difference is that great if it cost FPS as you play.
Personally, I would like to see more vegetation on a route which would, in turn, cover the ground a bit better and hide the 'weaker' ground textures.

That's my two cents worth.

Hi Rick:

Thanks for the input. Like I said, I don't know if high-detail terrain impacts the FPS or not. I intend to experiment (tonight) to see.

As for no vegetation and the "weak" terrtex. Yup... you're looking at a "raw route" in development. As yet, none of those elements are placed or even created for it. The current terrtex is a place holder. Eventually, there would be vegetation and such, but not right now. However, this particular area in Colorado was very barren in 1893, so even in a completed state this area of the route would not have gobs of trees and vegetation.

Oh... one more thing... and which do you think is the Seamless high-detail data? A or B?

This just in: No in-game difference in FPS at any location sampled!

B looks like the high detail data to me, but it does not look to me like it would be worth converting a route to use it.

Doug

No matter what kind of DEM's you start with, DEMEX converts standard tile data to an 8 meter terrain mesh in order to make it acceptable for the sim. So all is well. The algorithm to do that must be really something.

Similarly, DM terrain mesh will always be 1/24th of std or 192 meters.

Having struggled with old 30m DEM's in the steep parts of mountains, if given a choice I would always pick 10m data...

I hereby disqualify myself from directly answering the question posed.

regards,
charlie

See guys? I told you! Charlie is a Demex/DEM Guru!

I agree: The 10m will be worth it, however, there's a few more things I need to learn/figure out before I can begin work on the CM version that has it applied.

Charlie: You have an email sitting in your inbox.