Hi there, I am wondering why the hills of the Eifel in the background are looking so high. They are way too high compared the real situation. Is it because of the horizon? to cover it?
the camera is pointing in complete different directions on the pictures. On the first you look down a valley, where the cars come up and through NGK shicane, on the second pic you look at the last corner and to the main straight that goes a bit uphill first. You even see how the terrain falls off on the right side of the pic (the direction where the camera of the first pic points at) And I think you should take the FOV into account for this optical "illusion" or whatever you gonna call it.
look at Bathurst, there are similar issues … we need laser scanned tracks (surface and environment) and better google maps / earth dates … for a blow away racing experience / realistic tracks (feeling)
laser scanning is pointless as all tracks evolve ;tarmac heats up and moves in braking zones etc . the realism argument doesnt hold water as you only want realism on certain aspects not full realism .... Andi
Laser-scanning isn't pointless as it's surely easier to build a track from laser-scanned data over other methods plus the topography should be more accurate. But it is just a snapshot of the track surface at a moment in time and can quickly cease to be any more accurate than a well-built track using CAD data or whatever.
i personally don't really care if a track is laser scanned or not. It never was a reason for me to like a sim or track more than an other. So.... I don't give a shit
The nord in real life is also a little more bumpy in my opinium, if I look on onboard videos on youtube...RRE is very flat Some places on the nord have also double fences.. like plantzgarten 2 and this year they have rebuilding the sand by brunchen... and the hill by fluplatz. I hope they can make a 2017 version of the track
All down to DoF in the first pics, regardless of the fact they are shot from totally different angles and elevations!
every laserscan nordschleife out there uses the same data since there is a company selling this data. They cannot close the track for every sim developer to laserscan the track But then they have raw data .. a point cloud thingy (read that somewhere in a forum), what the track designers do with it in the end is another story. It's not like they scan the track and it pops up in the game.
I think it all comes down to perspective and stuff. Looks OK for me. Oh, that was the best I could do to replicate the first picture.
yea, I think the mountain range at Bathurst looks also a bit to high to what I saw during Bathurst 12h. It depends on the fov but they are too high form what I can see. This is nothing that can be laser scanned, ok with an helicopter but how is gonna pay that. It is also hard to get real elevation data from that region (Germany) but Google Earth can help. But I am sure that sector3 checked this information. Anyway, I just had the felling the hills are to dominant while watching replays at the Nürburging. I thought it also changed during one of the latest updates? A few month ago they were not so high I believe. Can that be?
Laser scanning wouldn't tell you how high the mountains in a couple km's distance are anyway, so... The bumps.. I think if we had the actual bumpiness of places like the Nordschleife, half of our cars would be jumping more than driving, the other half would give you massive motion sickness. There was this debate about camera shaking a while back and some person mentioned a very important aspect to those kinda things, which is that the eye is build to compensate for shaking, sth we only can have to a certain extent in a video game I guess.