Oh...and also wanted to point out...building lean is an issue because of the way Google is sourcing imagery now. Imagery from state/local sources minimize building lean and they do it by writing it into their flyover specs. For our aerials, our specs make sure we don't have any building lean because we have them produce DTMs from the buildings as well as the ground (we have some 30 story buildings, too). When Google was using publicly sourced imagery...this type of imagery was captured and based on standards (and done by certified photogrammetrists). Since our imagery was in that data set...it met our specs for a while, but once they started sourcing their own imagery (with their own specs)..things started to fall out of alignment. Now they 'got their own planes' and are using whatever techniques they can to map the world...which is fine, but it won't be as tight it used to be because they are mapping larger areas...so for us, it might not work out anymore..and for you, you'll see building roofs in the middle of streets and you can't place your model..
BUT...then again..this a moot point because you won't be able to place your model in GE anymore. :0)
On Thursday, June 7, 2012 8:46:12 PM UTC-4, Paul van Dinther wrote:
Secondly, aerial photography is never perfect and on the edges of a photo you can always see the sides of buildings. It is impossible to place a building on that location and not see building imagery show from under the building. Some modelers produce fake surfaces to hide this fact but only add more trouble once the next photo update is applied and the model ground remains old.