Message Areas - "Towards an integrated DEM file import tool"

Train-Sim.Com Message Areas

"Towards an integrated DEM file import tool"

Email this topic to a friend
Printer-friendly version of this topic
Bookmark this topic (Registered users only)
Previous Topic | Next Topic Conferences MSTS Route Design (Protected) Original message
zorcan (89 posts)
Dec-10-01, 04:31 AM (EST) "Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-01 AT 05:04 AM (EST)TSTF3 has just been released. As I plan it, there will be no more features to be added - it now does all that I intended it to do.It has become clear, however, over the past few weeks that TSTF has almost everything needed to become a universal DEM to MSTS import tool. The only thing missing is the ability to read DEM files.I have spent too much time on this already and have no personal interest in adding this facility. I would, however, like help others achieve this by offering the source code to TSTF to someone who is prepared (and able) to add DEM import to it.There are 2 scenarios:1) That person/team undertakes to take the entire project on and maintain/support all existing TSTF features.2) He/she/they simply create a DEM to tile tool, in which case I will retain "ownership" of TSTF and release only that source which is relevant to the new tool.There will be some Ts and Cs - primarily that it will remain freeware and that due credit is given to me and everyone else who has contributed.I will also need to be satisfied that whoever takes this up can deliver. Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Table of Contents

Subject Author Message Date ID RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... LawrenceKellie Dec-10-01 1 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... zorcan Dec-10-01 2 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... LawrenceKellie Dec-10-01 3 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... zorcan Dec-10-01 4 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... rgarber Dec-10-01 5 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... Mitch Dec-10-01 6 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... rgarber Dec-10-01 7 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... kxs156 Dec-10-01 10 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... zorcan Dec-11-01 16 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... kxs156 Dec-10-01 8 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... rgarber Dec-10-01 9 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... kxs156 Dec-10-01 11 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... rgarber Dec-10-01 13 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... kxs156 Dec-10-01 14 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... rgarber Dec-10-01 15 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... Hawk Dec-10-01 12 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... zorcan Dec-11-01 17 RE: Towards an integrated DEM file ... rgarber Dec-11-01 18

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Messages in this topic
LawrenceKellie (893 posts)
Dec-10-01, 08:16 AM (EST) 1. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" Since any comment I make can be viewed as smug and prickily or insulting, I really do hesitate to respond.However, I will.There already is a DEM to tile utility. It is DEM-EX. You should contact JohnCS about integrating it.Lawrence Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
zorcan (89 posts)
Dec-10-01, 08:35 AM (EST) 2. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" Lawrence,My understanding of DEM-Ex is that it imports ASCII UTM xyz files only.The dem files (as far as I'm aware) which are freely available are not to this format, and therefore need something like Microdem to convert them first.DEM-EX also has problems:It creates troughs (i.e Lays waste ) in the landscape immediately around the uploaded area.There are problems associated with routes which span UTM zones.You are sufficiently aware of the concept behind TSTF to see what I would like the community to have - a simple to use single toolset to take them directly from standard DEM formats to Route tiles.That is what I hope to help someone achieve.Thanks for the message,Mick Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
LawrenceKellie (893 posts)
Dec-10-01, 11:35 AM (EST) 3. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" >My understanding of DEM-Ex is that
>it imports ASCII UTM xyz
>files only. That is exactly correct.>The dem files (as far as
>I'm aware) which are freely
>available are not to this
>format, and therefore need something
>like Microdem to convert them
>first. That is exactly correct.>DEM-EX also has problems:
>
>It creates troughs (i.e Lays waste
> ) in the landscape
>immediately around the uploaded area. That is incorrect. There is a solution to that which is 100% foolproof--in my experience. However, you object to the fact that you cannot get it without parting with a little cash. Therefore, it will remain hidden to you.>There are problems associated with routes
>which span UTM zones. That is a fact which has no solution, at least in the foreseeable future. And that conclusion (no solution) is from a person who has worked with DEM and other such items for a very long time--Dr. Peter Guth, Associate Professor of Geology, U.S. Naval Academy, graduate of MIT in 1981.>You are sufficiently aware of the
>concept behind TSTF to see
>what I would like the
>community to have - a
>simple to use single toolset
>to take them directly from
>standard DEM formats to Route
>tiles. That is what is being currently worked on. At this point, there will be no solution or progress for the next several months--unless Kuju or MS brings something out.Lawrence Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
zorcan (89 posts)
Dec-10-01, 11:55 AM (EST) 4. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-01 AT 11:56 AM (EST)Lawrence,If I though spending $5 would get me an integrated and easy to use DEM importer rather than just a described procedure, I'd have already done it - I've just parted with a considerably larger sum than that just so I stand a chance of modelling Brunel's Albert bridge .There is no technical reason why DEM import spanning zones cannot be achieved - all it need is the right tool. And we don't HAVE to wait months fot it - TSTF already supports seamless UTM zone transitions.And so we don't get into an interminable argument about this, I'll tell you exactly how a modified TSTF would do it:1) You'd import the first DEM first into TSTF (covering say zone 5).2) You'd then repeat this for the second DEM file (say zone 6)3) TSTF would merge them together, then interpolate to improve the resolution from whatever the DEM file held to 4 metres.4) It would then allow you to use any part or all of the new terrain to directly update the route tiles.Now wouldn't that be a good thing ? Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
rgarber (768 posts)
Dec-10-01, 12:37 PM (EST) 5. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-01 AT 12:44 PM (EST)Zorcan,You keep referring to the $5 cash outlay as if there is something inherently bad about that. I wish you'd come out and say exactly how this $5 Tutorial, even though it's just a series of procedures, offends you.Let me explain the need for the DEM Tutorial and maybe you'll cease referring to it as bad thing.First, DEM preparation may not be new to you, but it is new to most folks here. The truth is, neither you or anyone else ever really campaigned for it's effectiveness other than 'just' making a route more realistic. The truth is, DEM cuts down the route development time, amazingly!Second, you never wrote anything that I can recollect as a tutorial to which they could do DEMs on their own. While your TSTF program may be valid for overseas work, it was Lawrence who pointed out how a time consuming process it could be. The idea of tracing individual contours may be appealing to you, but that sounds awfully long to me. Am I saying you did a bad thing? No, I've recommended your progam, soooOOOO many times to people who have contacted me who couldn't find DEMs for their areas.Third, you even refer to your manuals that they are lengthy. So how appealing is that to folks who aren't used to DEM? The DEM Tutorial is not a breakthrough in DEM preparation. It's just one way amongst many to do it. But unlike the others, it's now documented so even a newbie can understand it.Fourth, and with no intent of malice, I don't want to trace map contours, if I can import DEM into my route using 'this little $5 process' why should I have to learn a whole new program just to do it? Again, I'm not saying what you did with your program is wrong. But this process is easy, it works, and the goal is to get the person PAST the terrain modeling so he can finish his route in a timely fashion.Why not make it freely available? Real simple. Post it here, and it will get lost. I can't even find your TSTF in the archives anymore. And I notice your post shows the newest file being kept off-site as well.I believe that if you acquired the DEM Tutorial yourself, you would see that its not a cheap undertaking. While you wrote a whole program, just to model a bridge(?), I have created a tutorial that allows someone so totally new to DEMs have a shot at including DEM in his route. If you were here in the states, and you wanted to do a route modeled with DEM, and had the chance to reduce the time to create a route, for $5, you wouldn't do it for $5????And not this was planned, but alot of folks it turns out can get the DEM Tutorial for free, because when they sign up for PayPal, the give some kinda $5 gift certificate. Rich Garber Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Mitch (6 posts)
Dec-10-01, 02:35 PM (EST) 6. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" Rich, if you model the UK or Europe the resolution of DEM's is not high enough to be of any use, you end up with a gentle undulating lanscape not an accurate one. That's why tracing contours is more accurate if somewhat time consuming. Zorcans programme is excellent at what it does.
Mitch Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
rgarber (768 posts)
Dec-10-01, 03:29 PM (EST) 7. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-01 AT 03:32 PM (EST)Thanks Mitch for that information. However I don't think it's relevant to the discussion. My problem with Zorcan's remark "(so that someone can make few bucks from it)" is he keeps infering he's got a problem with my $5 DEM Tutorial. Rather than saying so outwardly, its done in ineundo. When someone refers to my efforts as 'out to make a buck,' I'd like to see what that person has done too to make such a remark against my efforts.Do you not agree?Rich Garber Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
kxs156 (18 posts)
Dec-10-01, 03:56 PM (EST) 10. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool"
>Thanks Mitch for that information. However
>I don't think it's relevant
>to the discussion. My problem
>with Zorcan's remark "(so that
>someone can make few bucks
>from it)" is he keeps
>infering he's got a problem
>with my $5 DEM Tutorial.
>Rather than saying so outwardly,
>its done in ineundo. When
>someone refers to my efforts
>as 'out to make a
>buck,' I'd like to see
>what that person has done
>too to make such a
>remark against my efforts.
>
>Do you not agree?
>
I think zorcan has done more than enough to show he is creating things for this community -- without "making a few bucks from it" (which his program easily could). It seems to me that you feel a little uncomfortable with his comments; is it perhaps because you, unlike zorcan (and many others), choose to not share information with the TS community without "making a few bucks".?ks Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
zorcan (89 posts)
Dec-11-01, 04:36 AM (EST) 16. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-11-01 AT 04:37 AM (EST)Rich,I wish you'd take the trouble to read what I'm actually saying.1) There is nothing wrong with providing a document as a guide to deal with the present limited tools that are available. 2) There is nothing wrong with charging for this, provided it represents your own work.3) What would be preferable to a guide through the swamp, however, is a means to avoid the place altogether.4) I do not advocate spending hours tracing contours for the hell of it THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE IF YOU WANT A DECENT TERRAIN BASED IN THE UK. TSTF was originally designed for that situation, although it now contains a gadget which is not available in any other form at present and which WOULD BENEFIT ALL ROUTE BUILDERS.5) I did not write a program to create a bridge - I bought it (TS Modeller).
6) TSTF has been posted here. The main reason I use the present location is beacuse it is relatively simple to upload it there - it took several days before my upload to this site took effect.
If you can tell me how and where to put it, I'll do so (be polite please )7) TSTF contains a bunch of routines which deal with locating and updating MSTS tiles. It can also perform coordinate mapping etc. If we add the capability to read the same DEM files that are availabel in the US and elsewhere then we get a single easy to use toolset to populate the MSTS tiles.I ask again - would that not be preferable than the present situation ? Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
kxs156 (18 posts)
Dec-10-01, 03:31 PM (EST) 8. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-01 AT 03:51 PM (EST)>>DEM-EX also has problems:
>>
>>It creates troughs (i.e Lays waste
>> ) in the landscape
>>immediately around the uploaded area.
>
>That is incorrect. There is
>a solution to that which
>is 100% foolproof--in my experience.
> However, you object to
>the fact that you cannot
>get it without parting with
>a little cash. Therefore,
>it will remain hidden to youThis attitude is so sad....Maybe we should all start charging for our TS related work instead of sharing it with our fellow simmers? Hell, why not start a membership fee for this board? Why exchange ideas for free when we can get a little dough for it instead? Fortunately, we have a lot of other people sharing their professional grade utilities, routes and models, and more. Thanks to all of you who selflessly spend countless hours doing this for no other reward than self-satisfaction.ks Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
rgarber (768 posts)
Dec-10-01, 03:56 PM (EST) 9. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" No offense meant KS, but if I just read your statement correctly, you just directed your statement at someone who has done exactly that. "Fortunately, we have a lot of other people sharing their professional grade utilities, routes and models, and more. Thanks to all of you who selflessly spend countless hours doing this for no other reward than self-satisfaction."LK has done this in more ways than you know. I just wanted you to know that. Rich Garber Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
kxs156 (18 posts)
Dec-10-01, 04:26 PM (EST) 11. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" I may be ignorant of LK 's other accomplishments (I mainly noticed his name since it figures heavily in posts that go way off track into negative bickering.)But in this case, and in previous posts, he has told zorcan clearly that he knows the answer to zorcan's problem (the DEM troughs) and refused to share that information, presumeably because sharing this will cut into the $5 "donations" towards the DEM tutorial. (Funny use of that word on your site by the way, you do realize donation implies a voluntary contribution? The TrainArtisan site has a good example of a proper donation.)I just don't think it's very much in the spirit of this community to refuse to share information you have discovered in order sell it. ks
>No offense meant KS, but if
>I just read your statement
>correctly, you just directed your
>statement at someone who has
>done exactly that.
>
>"Fortunately, we have a lot of
>other people sharing their professional
>grade utilities, routes and models,
>and more. Thanks to all
>of you who selflessly spend
>countless hours doing this for
>no other reward than self-satisfaction."
>
>
>LK has done this in more
>ways than you know. I
>just wanted you to know
>that.
>
>Rich Garber
Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
rgarber (768 posts)
Dec-10-01, 05:28 PM (EST) 13. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" KS,I understand where you are coming from. I really do. And I'm refering to the 'for free' thing, not the other part.What you may not know is the trough thing you are refering to is more common knowledge than you are being led to believe. There's a little bantering going on about here cause folks are upset. But the thing is, everything in the DEM Tutorial is already public. The difference, is the DEM Tutorial puts into one easy to read document one man's way of doing DEM. This is not an exclusive property situation. No, what I did was take the time to put it down on paper, where it has been done only a few times before, so you can read it. So why is it a secret? It's not a secret. Not getting the trough is just a byproduct of how this process works. The same process that eliminates the trough also does other things. In fact, the trough effect is really a minor issue, and I'm not even sure I bring it up in the tutorial, do I? I can't recall at the moment.Anyway, I didn't want you to misunderstand the significance of the word 'secret' being tossed about. It takes 45 pages of explanation and pictures to get the whole process understood. The way I am handling the DEM Tutorial is the best way because for one, it's not lost in the 6000+ posts, or in the archives or the uploads. It's right where you can find it. Need help? There it is.But just so you know.. there is no secret.. they're just bantering. Oh, on the Zorcan trough thing. You got me on why there would be a trough in his process. He has the contours traced in by the user so I wouldn't even think he get a trough. As I understand it, the processes are entirely different. We use DEMs, his process uses topological maps.Rich Garber
Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
kxs156 (18 posts)
Dec-10-01, 06:16 PM (EST) 14. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-10-01 AT 06:18 PM (EST)Rich, My initial terrain was DEM (using DTED-0) and I figured that all out through the posts here. I probably would have found your tutorial useful if I started later and had contiuned the DEM path, unfortunately there's nothing better for my area and so I've moved to the tracing method.Using this method has not only helped me generate great terrain, it is also great for laying tracks, roads, placing anything accurately, since you can trace anything into a marker file. In all the negative commotion over zorcans program (which I frankly do not understand...) this feature has been overlooked.This post started out with zorcan asking if anyone was interested in adapting his work to utilize DEM files. Now, maybe I am missing something but adding that feature would make his program useful for all you DEM people as well. No more MicroDEM, no more DEM-EX, just one program that directly takes DEM's and writes your tiles. Plus, you now have those great additional features such as tracing marker files, making manual edits to a DEM if needed, and more. Like you mention in another post today "how do we make this easier for the beginners?". I see a lot of potential in zorcans program as a all-in-one for creating terrain data (be it DEM or traced, or a combination), and as tool for track, road and object placement. With DEM import it will cut down the current process by one step atleast, and offer a lot more.But frankly, if I was zorcan at this point I would probably just say "sod off" to those DEM jerks, let 'em do it their own way and forget about it.ks Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
rgarber (768 posts)
Dec-10-01, 06:59 PM (EST) 15. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" KS,You're points are good and I'm in agreement with you completely. In fact, we're heading that way with DEMs, I got what you said right here. But I haven't had a chance to put it in the tutorial yet because I'm kinda caught up in all this bickering cause it's my tutorial that's being hit on too.I looked into Zorcan's program myself, downloaded every version, never installed it once because I didn't understand what DEM was and I was smack dab in the middle of a route. But I've always been open to what Zorcan had going.Problem is, and that's where any tutorial would have been helpful, no one explained DEM. Mind ya, I watched the DEM posts, but smack dab in the middle of building the Metro route, never really had time to dabble in it. Because, it wasn't just the route. It was the Routehelp pdfs.. the activity help pdfs.. always something.So when I started this new route I'm doing now, I was doing the terrain by hand again. But what happened was LK asked me to proof something of his and that's how I learned this process. Well to my amazement, instead of looking at chalkboards full of equations, it was rather easy. So I wrote the tutorial.And it follows along with all the other ones I did. The point is, they help people. You should see the email I got just a little while ago. The guy said he'd never do a route. Well, he just populated 63 tiles with DEM and can't get over it. When I first saw realistic terrain in Section 1 of my route, I sent Lawrence an email... 'There be mountains here!' When you've convinced yourself that you can't do it, and then do it... the excitement is genuine.That's what a tutorial is all about. I don't know if I ever sat down to read Zorcan's process if I would have ever picked it up. The point is, this one is available for folks like me, not too terribly DEM inclined, to learn a simple way to add DEM to their routes.So whatever that process is, that's fine. Right now this one is easy, it works, the DEMs can be gotten for free... why make this any tougher than it has to be? And that's what I'm saying. I didn't single out Zorcan's program. But I did feel my tutorial was being singled out. But that's all been straightened out. And all is forgotten as far as I'm concerned. The reason I responded to your post is most of us like I felt you was saying, couldn't care less which process the name has on it. We just want to know if we'll ever get it done or not. And like I said, this process is no secret. It takes fragements from posts all over the place, Lawrence Kellie's own refinements, and makes it available in something simple to read, and just as importantly, someting simple to get a hold of. And yes if I understand Lawrence correctly, tracks I know for certain, and roads if I'm not mistaken are covered in this next edition on how they can be added as marker files.Rich Garber Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Hawk (245 posts)
Dec-10-01, 04:35 PM (EST) 12. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" Having never heard of this "TSTF" thing, I can't speak for it. However, I have bought the $5.00 DEM tutorial compiled by Rich Garber (with guidence from Lawrence). Being a person with only a couple years of computer experiance and knowledge, I can adamantly state that I would have paid $10.00 or even $15.00 for this tutorial. It has helped me immensely.
It has made adding real terrain, to the 2 routes I'm working on, a cake walk.
The hardest part of the whole process is downloading the data.
zorcan--How can you honestly speak against something you haven't tried. You may be a "Master" at this DEM stuff, but I had no idea how to go about it until I got the tutorial. Not everybody is a "Genuis", like you.
I don't see a thing wrong with Rich asking for a $5.00 contribution for his time and efforts.
You, on the other hand, have no use for this tutorial because you know everything there is to know about it.
zorcan-Do not pay for this tutorial. Do not give it another thought. You don't need it. It sounds like, from the jest of the previous posts, that your program is time consuming. The only time consuming part of using Rich's tutorial is retrieving the data.
Folks, sorry for the bit of mild sarcasm. For some reason, zorcan's attitude just kind of got under my skin.
Rich, Lawrence, again, I thank you for your efforts on this well-written tutorial.
Hawk"And it comes to be, that the soothing light at the end of your tunnel, is just a freight train coming your way."
Metallica Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
zorcan (89 posts)
Dec-11-01, 06:54 AM (EST) 17. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" LAST EDITED ON Dec-11-01 AT 06:57 AM (EST)Hawk,I'm modelling in the UK, where useable DEM data don't exist, I can't use this approach.TSTF is designed to help people in this situation.I have nothing against Rich's procedures for dealing with DEM data - what I am trying to achieve, however is creating a single toolset which lets you handle DEM files and update tiles more easily than can be done at present.It is not my intention to upset anyone. I am simply trying to point out that double standards seem to exist here - it is being demanded of me that I "hand over" information which I have (and which is already posted elsewhere in this forum). I am accused of being unhelpful to the community.Yet, when I asked for some information ( which I understood not to be readily available, but it seems is also in the public domain) I was denied, because it was to be made available at price.I have now posted this information.It is my wish to help EVERYONE who uses DEM data, but I need help from Forum members to do this. Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
rgarber (768 posts)
Dec-11-01, 08:14 AM (EST) 18. "RE: Towards an integrated DEM file import tool" Zorcan,Man, I just totally give up on you. You posted:"It is not my intention to upset anyone. I am simply trying to point out that double standards seem to exist here - it is being demanded of me that I "hand over" information which I have (and which is already posted elsewhere in this forum). I am accused of being unhelpful to the community.Yet, when I asked for some information ( which I understood not to be readily available, but it seems is also in the public domain) I was denied, because it was to be made available at price."Yesterday I worked hard at turning this mess into peace but you just can't resist to get in some last digs. You still insist on stirring the pot.First, in summary, the discussion was not about you turning over information at all. The discussion was your 'smug' remarks in the post with you and Lawrence which you clarified. Why should we expect you to turn over anything when you already pointed out it was public domain. All Lawrence was asking was where was it?Second, I only asked you to volenteer the information because you volenteered it yourself. I had no idea whether Lawrence wanted that info or not. It was an effort to get this nonsense off the board.What information you keep refering to that you are wanting is a mystery to me. What you haven't figured out yet, if you want any information from us, you are going to have to get it from Lawrence. He's the guy with the process, not me. I just wrote the process down. So all your belly-aching whining about whatever it is you want, well you are just going to have to learn to get along with him, if you want it.Third, and that you continue to take my tutorial and characterize at some money making scheme, and then out of the other side of your mouth say 'oh, I'm not trying to attack Rich's tutorial...", you are certainly entitled to your opinion but your as phoney and transparent as they come.Frankly I have gotten so fed up with your pettiness I just don't give a hoot anymore. You just couldn't let it drop could you?
Rich Garber
Remove | Alert Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Lock | Archive | Remove

Lobby | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic