All aviable Laser Scanned tracks @ rF2 ! ! !

Status
Not open for further replies.
at least in the videos the tracks from ohwstudios don't look really good.
Even the scanned ones. Not something I miss tbh
 
And laser scanned or not, the track is only a snapshot in time. When Nords 2018 came available, several of the regular Ring drivers commented how the bumps had changed in a couple of places. And at this weekend's Road America event for IMSA, a driver who had not been there for several years commented on some new bumps have appeared.
Tracks are organic in the sense they change due to harsh weather and over-all usuage. No matter how good the scan is, what was scanned in 2018 may not represent 2020.
 
That of course is true. Laser scanned tracks are correct for the time they were scanned. But what did you expect? Some spooky long-distance effect they are correct every time you race them in a sim?

What is the alternative to a laser scanned track? Non laser scanned track and the track creator puts in some few well known bumps and all other bumps and details are completely artificial. BTW, if you look at free rF2 Nordschleife (based on COM8 and friends rF1 version) even the track flow is by FAR not correct. Not even talking about bumps and tarmac details.

I at least am very satisfied that the laser scanned track i race on was correct in one point of time. And if i know that time (like 2018 for rF2 Nordschleife) it was scanned, i too know what sections have rebuilt since it was scanned.

BTW, I raced Nordschleife in 2016 and 2017 with my own shitty VW Passat. In 2018 i was a co-driver in a Porsche GT3 RS. Even my memory of Nordschleife is a snapshot in time and i want to replicate that drive from 2018 in rF2 (in detail what fascinated me most for that drive, those many losses of grip and getting grip again in a lot of corners - which i think partly is a result of tarmac bumps and details, you only get realistic in laser scanned tracks)
 
Last edited:
Agree, rF2 Spa 1966 is just awesome, even more when driven in a rF2 1966 F1. But since this is a historic track, its a different problem. But would there be detailed laser scanned data for 1966 Spa (which of course is not possible) i again would prefer it a lot to artificial data.
 
Last edited:
vittorio said:
I don't want to be a party pooper. But you sure all know many are illegal conversions violating copyright. Just tell you before S397 will close that thread cause of that
Click to expand...
Why would you think anyone from S397, would read or care about what is on official forums;)
 
Wayne Hutchison said:
Don't the ground-based scans typically have a higher density point cloud? But aside from that, same general idea.
Click to expand...
As was answered already yes a ground scan is of a MUCH MUCH higher resolution. However much of that resolution is thrown away. I built Calabogie off a ground scan provided by the circuit (AC mod) and I had to resample the data down to a usable level anyway as the files were just too massive to deal with. Plus no consumer sim will benefit from that crazy level of detail. I brought a single tile down from about 30 million points to about 2 million per tile making it about 57 million for the entire track. Yet still didn't even use that much detail in the actual road mesh the sim uses.

In contrast a scan of a full track using decent aerial data would give you maybe 5 to 10 million points for the entire circuit. Now the point density is only half of it. There is some error that comes into play that introduces some noise when scanning from that longer distance from an aircraft. If you know what you are doing you can filter out that noise and get a nice smooth circuit off the data. You will pick up all the key aspects of the real circuit at the time it was scanned. Even larger bumps and dips in the real circuit will come through. However after the fact you must add in some synthetic noise to make it feel realistic.That final part is where if you don't know what you are doing can easily ruin a driving mesh. It takes lots of time to test and tweak your values to get it just right. It can help if you have telemetry data for a particular car to compare damper movements to. For example when I built Road America it too was on aerial data but the bumps were all built according to telemetry data and it pretty much matches 100% 1:1 to the real thing.

I still maintain that give me good aerial data and I can build you a circuit you can train with for the real deal. I have real life pro drivers come to me to say how accurate Watkins, NJMP, and Road America are after they trained on it in sim and then drove the track in real life. Many track day warriors have also told me they gained seconds since their last visit to the track after using the sim on my tracks to get more familiar with the circuits. In the end that is all the verification I need that my process works and aerial data is all you need to make an accurate circuit.

Ground data is amazing and indeed takes all the guess work out of the equation. On the other hand aerial data can also be used to get a very high level of accuracy.

Two comparisons of aerial built tracks compared to RL. NJMP was in early beta form at the time. And yes that Road America is coming to RF2 after the final AC update later this month.

 
Last edited:
Shadak said:
OMG yes!!! One of my favourite tracks. the 2016 version in workshop isnt bad but this would be amazing.
Click to expand...
I was watching a snippet of the Lambo super tropheo races at Road America today... the cars 'looked' fast due to the nature of the track surface. No super smooth Kart track, Road America moves and the cars racing on it move as well, which enhances the sensation of speed. We can always use another Elkhart Lake...ps...what is with that gravel-pit excavation outside of turn 3? Is that gonna eat through to the circuit eventually?
 
Lazza said:
A sticky referencing ripped content on an official forum?
Click to expand...

Information, is information. What an individual chooses to do with that information is on their conscience.
Perhaps the tracks with dubious origins could be noted as such,or even removed from the list.for anyone new to Rfactor 2 i think there is information here of interest,and it would be nice if it could easily be found.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top