Have a look at how laser scanned tracks are built!

Silverstone is in both iRacing and AC. Perhaps sections of silverstone can be compared between AC and iR? assuming the areas in common between the two tracks were not repaved?

 

if Kunos need more people, they could hire more, wouldn't they?
they have their budget and time schedule, so they know what they are doing

I don't think having modders doing some trackside objects is the answer, - these are not the things that takes that much time, so they won't save that much times .. days at the most, not weeks or months

 

Well Trento seems to have plenty if opportunity to view the surrounding terrain so we should see soon how they measure up.

 

iRacing has an older Silverstone configuration irc.

 

Thanks for the link, but I'll quote the article:

Your statement about "bump map with a resolution of 30cm" is a bit misleading. The surface resolution is irrelevant to some extent - you may create track surface with 1mm resolution but if it is based on few meters GPS accurate positioning it'll be pointless.

The final measure you should relate to the track surface is it's accuracy and from the article above turns out, that about 30cm horizontal resolution is enough to provide 1cm accuracy of the in-game track surface.

On the other hand, from what I've read about mobile laser scanning used by AC, this technique provides a few centimeters accuracy (compared to 1-2mm accuracy of stationary laser scanning as used by iRacing), so even using 1mm resolution you cannot guarantee 1cm accuracy for the track surface.

Everything I said was literally taken from the video about laser scanning technique used by iRacing:

 

Thank you for that video, that is a great addition to this thread. However, I think you are drawing your own conclusions erroneously from the available data, because nothing I said was misleading.

Again, this is the physical track surface in Assetto Corsa. If your statement of a "few centimeters accuracy" would actually be true, that would in reality mean en error margin of a few centimeters, which obviously is not the case:

 

Track surface visualization doesn't determine any accuracy. You can make surface with such a resolution even for a fictional track although it would be laborious. When you have a laser scan, you can make a track surface down to the laser scan resolution even if it's not that accurate just for the immersion factor.

 

Yes, that is why I asked if sections in common between the two version could be compared.

 

exactly..its clear to me kunos is largely ignoring trackside stuff, but modders should be able to easily provide HD packs if kunos doesnt get there. laserscanning a track should be about the track. i'm a big graphics guy, but the surrounding details, in whats set to be a very moddable game, will come. will they be within 1-2mm accuracy (or whatever people are arguing about)? hell no...but who cares? some nice trees & a good skybox to go w/ whatever other accents are necessary for each track will help immersion but the key thing for kunos to get right is the track itself. its really cool to be able to compare times to real-world ones knowing the track is 99.999% accurate.

 

I'm late to the party here but my understanding was that Kunos had encrypted all the files for cars and tracks and as such no one would be able to add/change any of the official tracks which sadly means we surely can't edit any of the tracks to make them more pretty/accurate with real world track side objects.

 

Someone could make objects and Kunos could add them.

There's very little to improve about the racing surface.