Trees - LiDAR vs OSM

[yuppatron]

Working on a new RCR and am torn between what to do re: tree imports.

• OSM enables trees to be placed exactly where you want them, but most need to be swapped/adjusted for the correct tree type/size. The benefit is accuracy, but a lot of work then needs to go into redoing nearly everything.
  
• LiDAR, at least for my course, is really good when it comes to tree size and type. Probably need to swap out a quarter to a third of them. The downside I've noticed with LiDAR is the placement and number, great example is where there is a tight bunch of trees, LiDAR knows the canopy height and width, but might use more or less trees to achieve this rough result. Not a problem in a lot of places but it's an issue in some spots that are integral or features of the course.

I notice in Chad's Tool there's an option to select LiDAR and OSM trees. I am at work and can't try this right now, does anyone know how this works? Is it any good?

Starting to realise that i'm quite anal about my RCR in terms of accuracy so I am probably leaning towards doing the painstaking but accurate use of OSM trees. But I'd love to hear any thoughts, suggestions, philosophies that you adopt in your RCRs.

[Heisenberg]

I'm still learning the options that you've mentioned but if you have really accurate images/flyovers of the holes and the planting, I personally wouldn't import any plants at all and do it all manually. Multi / auto plants look like multi/auto plants and IMO nothing can compare to the time and care of doing it yourself, choosing the best trees, sinking bushes into the ground, rotating grasses, etc etc. The only thing I auto-fill is the background planting. I'll be publishing a lidar that I've fully planted myself tomorrow with a maxed out meter (NSW Golf Club) if you wanted to take a look. By no means am I great (or even good) at planting but at least you can tell the difference between auto planting and planting that has had A LOT of time taken with it

[neal]

Personally I like a mix of the LIDAR ones from Chad's tool and manually planting. The trees it pulls in are sometimes accurate, and when it is it saves some time.

[Heisenberg]

Fair call. I guess you can delete any you don't like anyway since it takes almost no time.

[neal]

Exactly! I will say - I am excited about trying out planting with splines in 2k21. Working on a course right now (Sanctuary Golf Course in Colorado), but am still cleaning up the LIDAR import.

[paddyjk19]

Aug 25, 2020 23:58:10 GMT -5 yuppatron said:

Working on a new RCR and am torn between what to do re: tree imports.

• OSM enables trees to be placed exactly where you want them, but most need to be swapped/adjusted for the correct tree type/size. The benefit is accuracy, but a lot of work then needs to go into redoing nearly everything.
  
• LiDAR, at least for my course, is really good when it comes to tree size and type. Probably need to swap out a quarter to a third of them. The downside I've noticed with LiDAR is the placement and number, great example is where there is a tight bunch of trees, LiDAR knows the canopy height and width, but might use more or less trees to achieve this rough result. Not a problem in a lot of places but it's an issue in some spots that are integral or features of the course.

I notice in Chad's Tool there's an option to select LiDAR and OSM trees. I am at work and can't try this right now, does anyone know how this works? Is it any good?

Starting to realise that i'm quite anal about my RCR in terms of accuracy so I am probably leaning towards doing the painstaking but accurate use of OSM trees. But I'd love to hear any thoughts, suggestions, philosophies that you adopt in your RCRs.

The LiDAR tree tool uses up a lot of memory but can be useful to get the right heights BUT I always map out large wooded areas using “areas” on OSM and then I individually mark the trees that are directly in play or significant. You don’t want to import LiDAR trees with the new game as you’ve got so much more choice of trees now (33 pages!) so if you want it to be authentic, just map the trees and do it from scratch, it’ll come out better

[paddyjk19]

Aug 26, 2020 17:29:07 GMT -5 neal said:

Exactly! I will say - I am excited about trying out planting with splines in 2k21. Working on a course right now (Sanctuary Golf Course in Colorado), but am still cleaning up the LIDAR import.

I can tell you now that splined trees are a great idea but horrible for LiDAR courses as they use a @!$# ton of memory!

It’s still best to use multi plant trees for large wooded areas and then individually plant other trees.

Splinting grass is really good though if you just reduce the fill amount slightly. I’m getting all the trees done first and then if I’ve got lots of meter left I spline grass areas with one type of grass and then duplicate the spline with a couple of other types of grass and this gives you a really good look if the meter lets you.

Can do a video if people aren’t sure what I mean

[yuppatron]

Thanks all for advice. My course is not densely wooded so marking wooded areas wasn’t essential or needed, for me it’s more about the trees that line each hole and sit between fairways as it’s a tight course and thus recreating it makes tree type/size/position very important on a tree by tree basis.

I ended up using LIDAR trees in hope that I get some that are right position and size, and the theme type would result in some being some being good enough to not have to touch.

Too far gone now for me to turn back but for anyone ever facing the same dilemma in future I would recommend using OSM for important trees on course, because whilst that means you need to swap the majority you will have exact position if you do OSM tree tags accurately. I’ve realised that LIDAR, although reasonably good with tree heights, is not as accurate as I would like with location and where trees are close can add too many or too few. So i wish I’d done OSM because having used LIDAR I’m now spending a lot of time tweaking tree location. 

Regardless of which option I used a lot of tree type changes would be required.

Edit: this applies to trees on course or of strategic or aesthetic significance. If I had to do a genuine wooded area i'd definitely mark it as wooded area in OSM and then spline or multi-plant, and if necessary just change key trees on the edge of the wooded area.

[obmar]

i used combines OSM and Lidar option, how accurate are the tree heights in the import?

close enough for a guide? I started planting on my own and made the trees like 2X too big... a reference height via lidar could help my noobness

[paddyjk19]

Sept 24, 2020 13:31:44 GMT -5 obmar said:

i used combines OSM and Lidar option, how accurate are the tree heights in the import?

close enough for a guide? I started planting on my own and made the trees like 2X too big... a reference height via lidar could help my noobness

They canopy height is really accurate so it’s probably a good idea to use the LiDAR trees but they use a lot of memory so I would delete the vast majority but leave a few as a guide that you can plant the other trees from to get heights right. This should help without murdering the meter

[obmar]

I shall do this next time, too far gone now...

I found Google Earth Pro has 3D measurement capabilities too, and that has proven invaluable!