Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Custom Skins => Topic started by: Greebo on October 10, 2004, 02:32:19 PM
-
I've just uploaded this skin to The Skin Department (http://www.ah-skins.com/index.php). It is a Boston of 22 Squadron RAAF, the only Australian unit to operate the type. In RL the Aussie Bostons had their nose glass replaced with metal skinning and four 0.5 in Brownings fitted instead of a bomb aimer. This particular aircraft was flown by Wing Commander J.H. Emerton and notched up an impressive 186 combat sorties in the South Pacific between November 1943 and February 1945.
(http://www.gfg06.dial.pipex.com/sshot2.jpg)
(http://www.gfg06.dial.pipex.com/sshot3.jpg)
-
Very sweet Greebo!
Any chance you could do a French Boston and a USAAF Havoc with D-Day stripes? I'd post reference pics but they're packed away at the moment; I'm in the middle of moving to Germany!
-
Nexx you're thinking of a "groupe Lorraine" bomber ?
I've some references but finding doc. in my library is like speleology dark ,wet and dangerous !
-
I'm going to do one or more French A-20s. I like the 1940 Armee de l'Air scheme. The Vichy aircraft with the red and yellow ID stripes look even better but won't work on this skin unfortunately. I may also do a grey/green 342 Lorraine Sqn Boston with D Day stripes. Am I right in thinking that the Free French received no A-20Gs, just Ks?
A USAAF D Day striped A-20G is also on the cards, but there is a mirroring problem with the D Day stripes on the upper wings. What I'm going to have to do is an aircraft with the upper stripes painted over.
Next in line though is a Soviet Boston in winter colours.
-
I will check Greebo , I'm not very documented about bomber groups.
Avoid the vichy camo please , even if it's very colourfull it's not very acceptable for me :)
-
Nice One Greebo, and thanks..
-
It's a nice looking skin, but I have a question...
I'm seeing alot of skins where the markings... especially the white markings... are seemingly transparent, making them look like only a slightly lighter shade of the underlying base color. What is the philosophy behind this...? That the semi-transparent markings will let the panel and weathering detail show through from below?
IMO, white should be white. Panel lines and weathering should be applied OVER the painted surface of the aircraft, including the markings.
Like I said, just my opinion. Do it the way that makes you all happy... but look at some good photos from WW2; the markings do not look transparent. I just want to be sure that you're not all following some misconception or misdirection about skinning technique.
[ps. not picking on you, Greebo... this thread just reminded me of something I have been wondering about.]
-
The markings are a 100% solid layer but are not pure white, its 220/220/220 RGB IIRC. I find pure white looks too bright but maybe I'll up it a bit. On this particular skin I also used a lot of heavy brown and grey washes to simulate New Guinea dirt. I've got a photo of this plane which shows it caked in the stuff.
Weathering is always going to be a matter of taste, I'm told I am underdoing the effects as often as overdoing them. Still I appreciate the feedback, all constructive criticism is welcome and I'll have another long look at this one and the Green Hornet skin I did earlier.
-
Greebo - beautiful skin. I can almost smell that New Guinea mud...
Dux - the way I learned, the order of layers goes - base color, panel lines, rivets, paint, insignia/decals, then weathering on top of that. The paint and insignia layers are reduced in opacity to allow the panel lines/rivets to show through. Not sure how others are doing it though. Reducing the opacity of the paint layer gives an added benefit of making it seem faded - already one step ahead on weathering.
-
Naw, that's cool... everyone has their own interpretations, and I don't want to impose any of my own on anybody. It was just something I've been noticing (as a trend maybe) and wondered if there was some scientific method behind it.
rgr that, Oboe... I think you are using Bullethead's posted method for layering, which is perfectly fine. Personally, I use a different layering technique, whch goes from bottom to top: Base colors, details (engines, etc.), markings, weathering, panel lines, and rivets. I use transparencies frequently, but I only use certain modes of transparency, like Multiply, Screen, or Overlay.
I'm only saying this to show that there are many options for doing roughly the same thing. Definitely use whichever suits your purpose. :)
-
Interesting - I'll have to try it that way too. Thanks for mentioning it!
Thanks for crediting Bullethead, too - I forget where I pick up some of this stuff!
-
I do layering the same as you Dux. That way, you can have a full color base and you can adjust how much you want the rivets/panel lines to show through without losing any base coloring.
As you all said before, just a matter of opinion.
Oboe, you may want to check out this (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=105361&highlight=show+some+skin) thread. Its got some great info on skinning. Dux and Bullethead both contributed many ideas and info about skinning here. Its also what got me interested in skinning and includes my very first works. :)
-
Originally posted by Dux
It's a nice looking skin, but I have a question...
I'm seeing alot of skins where the markings... especially the white markings... are seemingly transparent, making them look like only a slightly lighter shade of the underlying base color. What is the philosophy behind this...? That the semi-transparent markings will let the panel and weathering detail show through from below?
IMO, white should be white. Panel lines and weathering should be applied OVER the painted surface of the aircraft, including the markings.
Like I said, just my opinion. Do it the way that makes you all happy... but look at some good photos from WW2; the markings do not look transparent. I just want to be sure that you're not all following some misconception or misdirection about skinning technique.
[ps. not picking on you, Greebo... this thread just reminded me of something I have been wondering about.]
For what it's worth Dux, often times the white on aircraft insignia was 'grayed out' to make it less of a target to site on.
This wasn't done consistantly but there are numerous photos of US fighters in particular with this done.
Dan/Slack
-
By the by ... notice ... it's not being flown by the invisible man. At least not in the first shot. :D
-
Boston modified with solid nose and 4x .50cal is a Havoc. Both are A20s, just different marks.
Just make the skin for the A20G Havoc, and you're all set!
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Boston modified with solid nose and 4x .50cal is a Havoc. Both are A20s, just different marks.
Just make the skin for the A20G Havoc, and you're all set!
Not positive on that. I think the Boston was the export version and the Havoc was the USAAF version. Havoc's later exported as well but the Boston was the early export model built to the export customer's specs, aka 303s in the RAF versions not 50 cal etc.
Dan/Slack
-
I like Dux put the panel lines and rivits over insignias and striping. I don't drop the transparancy of insignias etc. Because it's actually part of the paint.
If panel lines are too prominent over an insignia, I'll vary the transparancy of panel line/rivits in the area I'm working. With aluminum I'll vary transparancy of white and black panel lines/rivits differently depending on where on the plane they are.
If I want the insignia faded, I'll paint over it with a weathering layer.
There are many ways to build an apple :D When your done and it looks like an apple ??
You done built an apple :D
-
Early Havoc/Bostons were all glass nosed versions, but most had some form of fixed forward facing armament. Usually two to four 0.3 or 0.5in guns. The name was just a country specific thing, it didn't relate to the type of nose.
Apart from the RAAF mods, the RAF also modified some Bostons for night intruder work. First with 12 303s in the nose, then four 20mms in a belly pack. The latter arrangement was copied in the P-70 nightfighter, which were factory conversions of glass nosed A-20s.
The main difference between the G and the earlier models of A-20 was the twin 0.5in rear turret, but it was also the first production aircraft with a solid nose. The RAAF received some A-20Gs from the USAAF and I'll do one of those as a skin later on.
WRT layers, I go paint and markings lowermost, then weathering, then panel lines etc on top. I split the lines into panel line and hatch line layers and make the panel lines more transparent than the hatch lines.