|
Post by gmanuk1965 on Jul 13, 2021 20:10:43 GMT -5
So, as all designers know designing a course takes a while (at least 200 hours including testing) Creating from Lidar would take less time but not much less. So why do some designers, and it seems a lot do Lidar courses, place their pins on orange to red slopes making it nigh on impossible to play? If pins are placed in these areas imo courses like these will not be played often meaning all that time and effort making the course is wasted. First two Lidar courses I've played both had pins in these areas, last one I gave up after 5 holes.
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Jul 13, 2021 22:13:21 GMT -5
Without knowing the courses you're referring to, I think there's a fair chunk of LiDAR courses that end up being essentially left alone and simply imported and published. Also, since the courses need to be first published in TGC 19, I wonder if there's some disconnect since the green speeds and colors on the green grids in TGC 19 are different from 2K21. Perhaps the designers do the design work in 19, publish, then upload and publish in 2K21 without checking?
I don't really know...I've never done a LiDAR course before. Just kind of wondering out loud, too, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Jul 13, 2021 23:53:27 GMT -5
Some lidar designers are lazy. Sometimes that’s actually where the pins are. Sometimes they put the green speeds way too high.
As a counterpoint, lidar can teach us a lot about what we think we know about course design - looking at the 3rd fairway at Old Macdonald made me reevaluate what I consider over-the-top sculpting. Equally, some pin positions in real life can be awful, particularly on the top/mini tours.
|
|
|
Post by gmanuk1965 on Jul 30, 2021 7:57:09 GMT -5
I'm attempting a lidar course at the moment (Whitley Bay Golf Course (Tyne and Wear)) but plan to put the pins in relative safety areas (having 1 pin out of 4 on a yellow slope maximum) Its going to be a while before I finish it though as I'm working on other courses.
I am find creating lidar courses a bit of a pain really. After the painstaking work of getting the lidar and creating the OSM template, the project is never in scale meaning you have to redo all the tee boxes to the correct distances.
I think creating blank lidar courses (no course but correct undulations of the terrain) is still a good idea though.
|
|
|
Post by yeltzman on Jul 31, 2021 4:47:02 GMT -5
I think how the blending is done in game you are always going to slightly out from a couple of feet to yards with the bunkers, greens and tee boxes etc,but when you consider it used to take me 6-8 weeks to plan out just the layout of a real course and now its done in minutes with the golf tool, its a real godsend to real course designers you still have to research and put the time in to make something worth playing, to me when you consider its an outside programme for tgc2019/2k21 not produced by HB its something pretty amazing the programme best thing introduced since tgc1 in my view.I also find some data is alot better than others if' its too bad i just move on the next project.
|
|
|
Post by gmanuk1965 on Jul 31, 2021 8:56:36 GMT -5
I agree with what you say and I'm not dissing Chads Tools because I agree it does help quite a bit with the beginnings out of designing a course but there is still some rectifications that need carrying out. As it happens I am going to stop lidar course design for a while. Yesterday I seen a review of my course and he slated it. I knew of a few mistakes but he found loads more (not enough sculpting, unintentional blindness). He reckons I should start from scratch and rewatch golf design videos and I think he is correct. Designers doing lidar courses will have to get the course as near perfect as possible and there is no chance I am experienced to do that yet
|
|