23 replies to this topic

[highfade]

DPRoberts mentioned in one of his excellent tutorials that you must aim to get a smaller plot size like 1700x1700 so that your resolution would be higher for sculpting and painting.

 

My questions is:  Will a 8192x8192 lidar and overlay with a plot size of 2300x2300 be better than a 4096x4096 version but with a smaller 1700x1700 plot size?  Is there a way to measure it or compare the quality of the lidar?  The 8192x8192 sounds better but you sit with a lot of wasted area around the course. There is also very little quality difference in the two overlays.

 

I've noticed courses with a very large plot size can have a big hit to framerate even if planting and 3d objects are few.

[DPRoberts]

I feel like you are addressing 2 issues there. Overlay and heightmap resolution.

First, the overlay - if you bring in the 8192*8192 and set the resolution of the image to 8192 in the inspector and can't see a visual difference between that and 4096, use the 4096. I'm guessing it's possible that satellite images don't always resolve the same quality. (Just different resolution cameras) Therefore, there may be no advantage to the upped resolution.

Heightmap resolution - having "8192*8192 lidar" - as far as I know, 4097 is your max heightmap resolution. Most of the builds I'm seeing people do are keeping terrain size under 2000mx2000m and running heightmap resolution of 2049.

It all comes down to control of the terrain mesh and terrain painting. Think of it in terms of meters/pixel

At 1700m/2049px, you have roughly 0.83m/pixel. Think of that as the 1 block you see when you use the terrain brush or terrain paint. You can only control in roughly 1 meter increments.

Hoping others might chime on how they view these things.

Edit - I'm running a 1500*1500 terrain at 4097 for Scioto. Going to have more Tris per square meter. Could impact lesser graphics cards...

[highfade]

Thanks DP,

 

My overlay isn't great but using 8192x8192 helps when adding stuff like mowlines etc. as I'm working in a higher resolution,doesn't it?  

 

Strangely I'm getting better framerate with the larger 2300 plot than the 1700 (4097) one.  I must just check the heightmap resolution of the 2300 plot. (Edit:  It is also 4097)

[highfade]

 

The one on the left is the smaller 1700x1700 plot showing the brush set to "1"  Otherwise all the settings are the same. 

[DPRoberts]

Yes, the 8192 will be a must if you want to add lines, especially narrower ones such as on tee boxes. Too much anti-aliasing appearance with a line at 4096.

The worse framerate if using the 4097 makes sense because you are able to "see" more Tris on the smaller plot. Look at it as a density of triangles. Using 4097, the number of triangles is fixed over the terrain, regardless of size. The triangles are more spread out over the 2300 (larger). You could test this by moving camera to different views and looking at the "stats" in the game view.

Interestingly, if you go to the terrain overlay, and everything gets meshed, the question for me is how high can you ratchet the pixel error. The reason I say this is that you are essentially on a mesh wherever the ball lands and you are rarely on the actual terrain. Because your terrain is essentially all mesh, it may not impact anything to go really high with it. My only worry might be the green and a putt bouncing out but that might not be a valid concern.

(A discussion of this was raised by the guy that created RTP for Unity. He has a way of tessellation for terrain mesh and turning pixel error to 200. We can't do tessellation in our version of Unity. But, the concept is similar using the CF meshes.)

[DPRoberts]

The one on the left is the smaller 1700x1700 plot showing the brush set to "1" Otherwise all the settings are the same.

If you measure, I think you'll find the pixel on the left to be .41 meters and the right .56 meters.

May make sense to stay with the 2300 plot if you like the framerates. But, I would also draw a few mowlines or divots or cart path lines and see how they appear as well.

[DPRoberts]

Sorry to be so thorough/verbose here but I think it's a good concept to understand regarding framerates and trying to optimize.

[highfade]

On my phone now. Will watch this tomorrow. I always learn some new stuff from you Dp so please don't hold back.

Even learned the meaning of the word "verbose"

[highfade]

The terrain brushes were very slow so I've changed my heightmap resolution from 4097 to 2049 in PS.  Everything seems to be okay with the new raw file but I might be missing something... seems too easy?

 

Can one change it back later if you need more precise planting around bunkers and so on?

[jspirate]

(A discussion of this was raised by the guy that created RTP for Unity. He has a way of tessellation for terrain mesh and turning pixel error to 200. We can't do tessellation in our version of Unity. But, the concept is similar using the CF meshes.)

 

 

Sorry to be so thorough/verbose here but I think it's a good concept to understand regarding framerates and trying to optimize.

 

Geeeeeeze, this would be nice to be able to do.  Thanks for sharing...

[DPRoberts]

The terrain brushes were very slow so I've changed my heightmap resolution from 4097 to 2049 in PS. Everything seems to be okay with the new raw file but I might be missing something... seems too easy?

Can one change it back later if you need more precise planting around bunkers and so on?

I edited a post above to let you know for Scioto my dimensions are 1500*1500 with heightmap resolution of 4097. I consistently run low 40s on my laptop with a 960GM.

So, it probably depends the audience you are trying to reach. If running 2049, I would do the 1700*1700 plot.

I think K11 fantasy plots usually started around 1600*1600 at 2049.

You could always go back to 4097 if you wanted. Not sure if that would reset any terrain painting but with overlay, I would save that until the end anyhow.

[highfade]

Thanks for all the info.

 

I'm using the 2300x2300 plot but went down to 2049 heightmap.  The plot is rather flat so it's fine and as you say I can always go up to 4097 if I need more sculpting around bunkers. Will have to keep an eye on the framerate though as I'm going to do quite a lot of planting.

[Dropzone73]

If you change the resolution of your height map later, you'll lose all your planted grasses. So make your decision before you put grasses in.

[Dropzone73]

Yes, the 8192 will be a must if you want to add lines, especially narrower ones such as on tee boxes. Too much anti-aliasing appearance with a line at 4096.

The worse framerate if using the 4097 makes sense because you are able to "see" more Tris on the smaller plot. Look at it as a density of triangles. Using 4097, the number of triangles is fixed over the terrain, regardless of size. The triangles are more spread out over the 2300 (larger). You could test this by moving camera to different views and looking at the "stats" in the game view.

Interestingly, if you go to the terrain overlay, and everything gets meshed, the question for me is how high can you ratchet the pixel error. The reason I say this is that you are essentially on a mesh wherever the ball lands and you are rarely on the actual terrain. Because your terrain is essentially all mesh, it may not impact anything to go really high with it. My only worry might be the green and a putt bouncing out but that might not be a valid concern.

(A discussion of this was raised by the guy that created RTP for Unity. He has a way of tessellation for terrain mesh and turning pixel error to 200. We can't do tessellation in our version of Unity. But, the concept is similar using the CF meshes.)

It's also possible to turn pixel error in your main terrain to 200 (=maximum) and base map distance to 0 (worst) with Unity 5 and CF compination and have the best looking course with the best frame rates ever. This tip is for everyone to know!!!

 

Just cover your whole terrain with splines and calculate the meshes (main terrain as small as possible!!!). Now you basicly have a terrain made of meshes (one big terrain mesh). Now turn pixel error to 200 and base map to 0 and UNCHECK "Draw"-checkbox of the terrain. I don't know if it's even necessary to adjust "pixel error" and "base map distance" when unchecking the "Draw"-checkbox. Shouldn't have any meaning imo, but who knows before it's tested. This way the original terrain is mostly out of the way from loading down the cpu and gpu power and everything works in the game and runs smoothlier than ever. So the terrain is still there, but your computer doesn't have to draw it. Trees and grasses are drawn as usual.

 

Only adjusting the pixel error and base map doesn't work, because the unaccurate terrain is horribly visible and popping out of spline meshes everywhere if you leave it visible ("draw"-box checked).

 

Will release SOON   my 4 hole "Pebble Beach test course" with this method.

 

Happy designing!

[DPRoberts]

What is comprising your cliffs then on Pebble? The lower res 2nd terrain?

[Dropzone73]

I'm not unchecking terrain. I'm unchecking the drawing of the terrain. Trees, grasses and splines are still there on the invisible terrain.

It doesn't matter if it's visible or not, or pixel error 200, Unity knows the exact spots for every plant and spline.

 

You have mesh that covers all the terrain areas, so there is no single reason to draw terrain anymore or keep it's pixel error in high quality.

[DPRoberts]

I get that...

You're meshing your cliffs then.

[highfade]

So it doesn't matter if you use a large plot size as you can just draw your outer spline the smaller size you like. That parts sticking out will just not be rendered in the game.

 

Great find, thanks!

[Dropzone73]

I get that...

You're meshing your cliffs then.

Yes, all the terrain 1, except the ocean and the last 0.5 meters from terrain edges. This is just because splines can't cross the terrain edge. Of course you can make the "terrain mesh" smaller than the terrain from edges, but you need to have good enough outer terrain under it for the view.

 

You have also different options with textures (overlay image etc.) when working with spline meshes and you also got the physics of different materials .

[DPRoberts]

Excited to see the FPS impact this will have. Going to run a few experiments.

It'll change how some of the course packages should be provided with LIDAR.

Seems like as small as possible terrain 1 with 8192*8192 satellite image and a second terrain of 3500x3500 (or so) with the same center.

Then on the periphery, as you reach the outer meshes the second terrain should come into view.

Best second terrain settings yet to be determined but could be 512 or 1024 heightmap resolution is my guess. Pixel error 5ish...