Italian Ju87D Stuka

[Geophro]

My move to Germany has been cancelled/delayed, so I found some time to fight with this some more.

This is an early teaser version of my Regia Aeronautica (Italian) Ju87D-3 with 216th Squadriglia, 121st Gruppo Autonomo  Tuffatori – Capua (CE) in early August 1943.

My references for this skin are:
Ali Straniere In Italia, Gli Stuka Della Regia Aeronautica; Becchetti, Fabrizio and Gueli, Marco; La Bancarella Aeronautica-Torino.
Regia Aeronautica Vol. I, A Pictorial History of the Italian Air Force; Shores, Christopher; Squadron/Signal Publications, Inc., 1976.
Regia Aeronautica Vol. 2, Pictorial History of the Aernautica Nazionale Repubblicana and the Italian Co-Belligerent Air Force 1943-1945; F. D’Amico and G. Valentini; Squadron/Signal Publications, Inc., 1986.
Luftwaffe Colours, Stuka Volume One, Luftwaffe Ju 87 Dive-Bomber Units 1939-1941; Smith, Peter C., Allan Publishing Ltd., 2006
Luftwaffe Colours, Stuka Volume Two, Luftwaffe Ju 87 Dive-Bomber Units 1942-1945; Smith, Peter C.; Allan Publishing Ltd; 2006
Luftwaffe Camouflage and Markings 1933-1945, Photo Archive 1; Merrick, K.A., Creek, Eddie J., and Green, Brett; Midland Publishing, 2007.







The basic color scheme is the standard German 70/71/65 (FS 34052 / FS 34083 / FS 35352) http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=34052,34083,35352

The German upper surface markings are painted over with Verde Scuro (FS 14077) http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=14077
This color is also used to reduce the Savoy cross on the tail.
I had originally used Verde Oliva Scuro 1 (FS 34079) http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=34079, as is usually referenced.  That color appears to be basically a lighter RLM 71, instead of a green lighter than RLM 70 but greener than RLM 71 as it is described.  So I went with the basic dark green.

The text for the reference plate says that the wing upper Balkenkreuzen were diluted with solvent.  But the text for the photograph, the photographs themselves and the camo planform view all show them overpainted with the Italian dark green.  So I painted over them with the dark green instead of trying to mimic the use of solvent.

The overpaint for the German markings on the underside is in Grigio Mimetico 1 (FS 36293)  http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=36293.

The white for the fuselage band, Savoy cross, fasces background and squadron number is Bianco Neve 6 (FS 37925) http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=37925

The red for the aircraft number is Rosso 8 (FS 11105) http://www.colorserver.net/showcolor.asp?fs=11105
I decided that some superstitious pilot did not want to fly aircraft #13, so he made them paint over the X to make it an 8 instead.  Once I got this completely unsubstantiated notion in my head, and although the difference is very subtle, it does not look correct to me done any other way.  So I did it as 13 with the lower legs overpainted with white to make it an 8 with the undersized V.

As shown here I have not started the dirtying up process at all.  All reports indicate that these aircraft saw very hard use and even less than a year after delivery would have been showing a lot of wear.  I want to get my panel lines and colors locked in first before I start all that.  I have the panel lines overly visible for ease of evaluation.  They are displayed here done in black with about 40% opacity.  All panels lines are one pixel wide (this is a 256x256 skin.)  For the final panel lines I intend to play with using a very dark green on the upper surfaces, a dark grey for the lower surfaces, and a light grey for the white areas, all with an opacity somewhere around 10%. 

I just realized that I left out the fuel and oil decals.  I will reposition the fuel decal from the original skin location to over the gas tank and make it yellow in accordance with Italian standards, but I will preserve the “Yo Daddy Superfly” text within the triangle.  I will also add a standard oil fill triangle farther forward.

It took a lot of effort to wrestle this monster into shape, so there is no reason to get sloppy now.  If you see something that can be improved, please let me know.  I'll get over it.

Blah, blah, blah, …ok here are the pictures:

[Geophro]

um, the following quote is from the submission instructions:

Modify the bitmap files in your working directory using a graphics editor.  Note:  Do not change the color format, all files should be 256 color bitmaps. Additionally, we will not accept a custom skin unless it is in 1024x1024 resolution. Older planes used 256x256 resolution and must be upgraded when doing a custom skin

So basically, I wrestled this pig in 256x256, and now I have make it 1024x1024?  That will make it much better but means I have to completely redo my panel lines.   Sigh.  See you all in another 3 months.

[Fencer51]

OH WOW I never knew that, I was struggling with SBDs and B5Ns are 256x256 earlier this year and got frustrated and quit.

[Motherland]

OH WOW I never knew that, I was struggling with SBDs and B5Ns are 256x256 earlier this year and got frustrated and quit.

They're even harder to do in 1024x1024. I did the JG11 Ta152 (RIGHT BEFORE THE GD UPDATED GRAPHICS MODEL CAME OUT lol)in 256x256 in 4-5 hours (panel lines, dirt, paint & everything).
Tried to do the Yak9U and C.205 in 1024x1024 and I got so frustrated I quit.

[Geophro]

OK, so my move is back on.  That means that this is a grat way to procrastinate.
So I have redone my panel lines.  I must say that 1024 if MUCH better to work with than 256.
I was very happy with how it turned out in 1024. 
That is, until I got ready to do the highlights and subject it to several months of hard use.
Now I notice that the model is trying to help me and is throwing crappy looking rivet heads and other "details" all over the place.  Is this from the texture file?  I imagine that it is, and if so the 256 textures on a 1024 skin look somewhat disappointing.  I cannot find any files that look like the stuff that is showing up.  Am I stuck with this stuff?

The first 2 pictures are teasers for the version that is currently going into dirtification:





This last picture is an example of my bonus "features" that have showed up.  None of that fuzz appears in my file.  Those details are 1 pixel wide on a solid background.   

[Xasthur]

I think your panel lines are way too dark and without the white line beside the black your panel lines look very 'painted on'.

It also looks a little too clean. It needs exhaust stains and stuff like that.

A few walk-way scratches would be a nice touch too.

[rogerdee]

your panal lines do look way to dar and just that lines.you need to fade them out a bit and ad the send lighter

line to make it look more like a panal.Also on the wing where its cranked up that is a higher joint ands is raised so needs to look more 3d then it is.
Its a good start to your skinging tho.

[Geophro]

Thanks for the help but I'm way ahead of you on all counts.  I mentioned somewhere in the wall of text that I cranked up the panel lines so you can see them better and the next step were the highlights and the wear.  What I would like some help with is those model details that are being forced on me like I showed in the third picture:

1)  Is there a way for me to turn them off?
2)  Is there a way for me to tone those details down?
3)  Is there some way for me to cover them up?
4)  Is there some skinner trick to make them not show up?  It seems like there is some logic involved in where they appear.  They seem to only appear at vertical or horizontal high contrast areas.  There is even another area (not shown) where it added what appeaars to be rivet heads at the demarcation of camo pattern colors.  I triple checked, and the details are not present in my bitmap.
5)  If the first 4 options are not possible, is there a way to modify some file (that I can't find) to at least improve the details that get added?

On a side note, it seems that the Stuka was about the worst possible choice to try as my first skin.  The good news is that if I ever get this into submittable condition, I should be capable of skinning anything.

Thanks for the help.

[Motherland]

Those aren't details, that's just distortion when converting your skin from the millions of possible colors you can have when you're making it to the 256 colors required for it to display in game. What program are you making the skin with?

[Geophro]

That is not distortion from the conversion to 256.
Here is a clearer example of what I am getting.

The first picture is a slice of the 256 color bitmap that is read by the game.  No distortion or extraneous features.
The second picture is that same exact slice as displayed.

Slice from the 256 color bitmap (JU87SID.BMP)


Same slice as displayed


Save both files to your computer and zoom down all the way to individual pixels.  You will find no distortion in the bitmap.
You can clearly see what gets displayed.
I hope that this explanation makes more sense.  And also shows why it's driving me crazy!

Oh, and I'm using Paint.net, since my other 3 super paint programs had, um, questionable pedigrees.  So they did not make the transition to the new computer last year. Shhhhh...

[rogerdee]

when bit maps are save at 256 they always distort depending or your program,some more then others.

there is a plug in called bright you can get from the simmers paint shop which converts the bit maps better.

[Geophro]

Although I could not see any distortion, with so many people pointing to that, I figured that there had to be something there.
I did the fuselage in a solid color.  The features went away.  That proved that I am telling the game to put them there somehow.
So I redid each layer from scratch.  Using the previous layer as a guide, that did not prove to be too difficult.
The features came back.

If I change either/both of the 2 major paint colors (RLM 70 & 71) to something else the features disappear.  All I am doing is a simple bucket fill to the appropriate color.
If I take either base color and tweak it just slightly so that it is almost the same color, the features change appearance but remain.

So although I am telling the game to put the features there, I still have no idea how it happens other than it appears to be directly related to the color choice.  The features are still not visible in the bitmap file that the game reads.

Any new ideas?

[Geophro]

Hopefully I won't get whacked by the ban stick for necromancy, but it has been a while since I have been able to work on this.

I am still not satisfied, but it is much farther along than it used to be.  Thanks to TK's reference to the Russian website, I was able to fix some of my panel lines that I had guessed at before due to lack of information.  But, I noticed today that one of the original panel lines was off by 2 pixels.  If I have missed that after hundreds of iterations, there is no telling what else I have missed.

As I step back from this to come back with a fresh perspective, I thought it would be a good opportunity to solicit comments.
Please let me know what you think I have underdone/overdone/omitted, etc.  In the process of fixing that stuff, maybe I can figure out how to make some of the stuff I am still trying to do look better.  Thanks for the input in advance.

[Motherland]

Nice! probably the best Stuka skin yet.

One thing, I would say that the roundels probably didn't have a white background.

[Geophro]

I rechecked my Italian reference books Gianpolo provided me, and the white background for the fasces varied.  I'd split the Ju-87 photos where you can see them at about 50:50 with and without the white background.  The general notes for the markings say black with white background, so that is what I went with.  You cannot see the undersides of the wing from the picture I have for me to prove either version.  I like the white background better, so I went with that.

I have made a few minor changes, but nothing worthy of more pictures.  Without any further suggestions, I intend to submit this one soon.

Thanks to the many who have helped.