Is this what the track surface actually looks like?

[eobet]

So, iRacing has their mythical "bump map" which makes their cars float but how does AC translate their details scans to its track surface?

Apparently (unless things have changed), the answer has been available for quite some time:

Perhaps I'm the only one who never got around to watching this video, but I nearly jumped out of my seat when I saw the image. iRacing has never shown anything like this, to my knowledge!

I think the detail is quite impressive, if this is the end result.

Using the photo mode app, I tried to zoom around the track to find any bumps, but it was really difficult to see (I would had no idea that the surface was so many polygons without the above picture). When you get up close to the white lines, though, some evidence of it is revealed:

One thing that is cool with iRacing, though, is the long videos and articles they produce that show some of what is going on behind the scenes (although, imo, indies like Shining Rock Software and Jonathan Blow have them beat by miles and miles when it comes to revealing technical stuff)...

...I wish Kunos would produce something similar for us nerds.

 

[Simon Roberts]

I meant what i said, because so it is done by Kunos. It has to be because if it would be the same you have too less polys for physics or to high polys for your graphics card.

Sorry i think was misunderstood by me.

 

[eobet]

I think I read somewhere on the AC site that they will be doing a behind the scenes thing after the offcial release.

Can't wait for that one!

But with the image posted above, they have already revealed more than iRacing ever did!

 

[Qazdar Karim]

If you like mathematics ,check this :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaunay_triangulation

i think this is the technique they used ! (not sure)

 

[Tom Uytterhoeven]

You can't see all bumps you can feel on the real thing either so

 

[ShredatorFIN]

Old thread, but seems the picture link is missing. This is the official AC Imola laser scanned physics mesh, an AC developer posted a while back. It's not rendered (would lower fps), it's behind the rendered visual representation, giving all the bumps to your FFB:

There was a discussion on official forums, where some people stated, that "all of the initial laser scan data is lost in the final mesh". Picture proves that it's not true at all. Very detailed. Too bad Zandvoort (as nice track as it is) is not laser scanned. I believe now iRacing is still the only sim with 100% of it's tracks scanned.

 

[Yapci]

In the vid they said that it takes 10 people and about 6 months to make a lasser scanned track. Thats the hole kunos team, and they dont all work on track neither graphics aspects.

So amazing job by kunos that are now trying to give people more and more content (they dont stop asking for it) and obviously Can not be done with that small team.

 

[Michael Hornbuckle]

I believe now iRacing is still the only sim with 100% of it's tracks scanned.

Iracing has always been the only sim with all of it's tracks scanned. Non-scanned Monza 66 has been in AC from the very beginning and Trento has been there since 1.0

 

[xnorb]

Laser scanned tracks (+not losing the important feeling of the track while optimizing the data) for sure add some of the "Woooh" and "Ahhhh", but beside the selected few that were able to actually drive many many many laps on that said track will never be able to tell the difference if a track is laser scanned or just very well replicated.

In the end, if the track creators get access to good reference data and get the chance to visit the circuit and drive a few laps around the track, then they will create a great track if they can bring their experience into the 3D program.
And laser scanned turns more into a PR gag than into something that really plays a big role.

 

[ShredatorFIN]

Iracing has always been the only sim with all of it's tracks scanned. Non-scanned Monza 66 has been in AC from the very beginning and Trento has been there since 1.0

True. Was thinking "modern circuit tracks",could have been more precise in my post. Trendo-Bondone isn't scanned and Monza 66 obviously isn't since not even DeLorean going 88 mph will get there to do the scanning

 

[Stereo]

I thought iR added a paved section to join the Monza oval onto the main straight that's not laserscanned (since in the real world the oval's paving is too messed up to drive that section at oval speeds) but that's getting picky.

 

[nonnex]

They all are making food with boiled water. That means that scanned data is nice, and accurate, and sound awesome and in fact it gives you a numberless cloud of measured points.. but

In the end its still handmade work to make a track out of this, because a cloud of points is not very siuteable to drive on or to do a track to race on. Its like painting with a guide (a LaZor scnn0rd Bob Ross I you will) The coal sketch is there but to make a sensible and intense picture art out of it is another thing. - Well if Bob Ross's Pics are art or not is another discussion -

It does not make that biiiiiig greeeeeeat difference if the points are measured conventionally by triangulation and transported to CAD or are laz0red. Ok, to be fair it makes a diff in time consuming and the number of measured points, but I doubt that the most of us would notice it, because the physics engines of our current sims are not able to compute a very high resolution.

So if someone thinks that a pebble stone could make a difference.. than sadly I (as far as I know) must say nope. Not today.