Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Custom Skins => Topic started by: Fencer51 on February 10, 2008, 08:25:08 PM
-
This is an interesting project. I had started it over a year ago and got distracted by other skins for other people and DGS.
I have several good pictures of this plane, and it has little paint wear and dirt on it. I will be adding some chipping and still have a couple stencils near the cockpit to do as well.
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_1.jpg)
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_2.jpg)
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_3.jpg)
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_4.jpg)
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_5.jpg)
-
Sweet skin. Awesome work!:aok
-
Looking sweet, but where's the love for the PTO? :rolleyes:
-
There is no love for PTO...
Can you include some cockpit shots looking out at the wing? I typically reserve final judgement until I'm sitting in it.
Technically speaking, you could include the front cowl fasteners in addition to the ones you already have on the rear cowling. Also, anti-aliasing on the panel lines perhaps...
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
Also, anti-aliasing on the panel lines perhaps...
yeah fencer, this is a gorgeous skin. the only thing i can bring fault to is the jagged lines...
you've said before that you don't think they look good anti-aliased, but what is your reasoning for that? surely you want a skin that looks as realistic as possible? if so, don't smooth crisp anti-aliased lines look far better than the jagged pixelated lines you usually use? :confused:
also i noticed that you don't run full screen AI in your screenshots, despite the fact your PC looks like it could handle it. is this by choice or do you not know about it? i personally think it makes the game look 10 times better.
-
Biggs, it breaks down to this:
You only get so many pixels to work with on the wing. To make the pixels as small as possible you do 1-pixel lines.
UN-aliased they have steps but only take up 1 pixel in those steps
ALIASED they take up between 1 and 2 pixels depending on the angle, as they alias across areas too small for pixels to display, as a result they fade in and out and get thicker and thinner along the path they follow, because they are aliased.
IMO the stepped looks better than the irregularity that aliasing them gives you.
I'm a fan for aliasing things, but it doesn't work on 1-pixel lines.
-
Look at Fester's panel lines on the top wing of Big Beautiful Doll. They're nice and smooth and look good. I've seen some skins where the jagged stair steps ruin what is otherwise a nice skin.
Just my opinion Gents...
-
:O Lookin' good!
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
Look at Fester's panel lines on the top wing of Big Beautiful Doll. They're nice and smooth and look good. I've seen some skins where the jagged stair steps ruin what is otherwise a nice skin.
Just my opinion Gents...
yup. i don't know what you're using krusty, but photoshop CS2 anti-aliases lines very smoothly, they're sharp and crisp, and look a ton better.
anyways, that's the only thing i can complain about fencer, the colours and overall look is right up there with greebo and fester :)
-
Ok did anyone look at the skin or did you just respond as usual?
Note the flap lines on the underwing shot, as well as the upper wing panel lines.
And the port nose lines.
I wanted to see if anyone would notice the anti-alienated :huh lines.
I think they are blurry and look like crap. But as normal I am open to trying different skinning techniques and did several things differently on this skin.
I am using the line tool with the anti-aliase check box selected. If I am not doing it correctly please let me know. :aok
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Biggs, it breaks down to this:
You only get so many pixels to work with on the wing. To make the pixels as small as possible you do 1-pixel lines.
UN-aliased they have steps but only take up 1 pixel in those steps
ALIASED they take up between 1 and 2 pixels depending on the angle, as they alias across areas too small for pixels to display, as a result they fade in and out and get thicker and thinner along the path they follow, because they are aliased.
IMO the stepped looks better than the irregularity that aliasing them gives you.
I'm a fan for aliasing things, but it doesn't work on 1-pixel lines.
And I agree with his description above completely. :O
-
I can blow your whole jagged lines don't use antialiasing theory out of the water with one simple fact.
everyone uses transparency for single pixel lines to make them look thinner. this is a form of antialiasing using transparency to reduce size.
antialiasing a slanted or curved line is no different when you think about it. makes no difference if 1 pixel or 2 are used when you are using 10-20% fill or opacity every single line curved or not is antialiased regardless.
-
I don't think I understand what you mean...
I don't use transparency with my lines, if I understand (but I'm not sure I do!) what you've typed. I use solid square pixels with a pencil tool
-
and then you set layer transparency or opacity or fill to a setting of anywhere from 5-30% no doubt.
why would you do that since you are using solid pixels?
because you are in fact antialiasing your solid pixel by a factor of 75% or more to a size 4 times smaller than it actually is using transparency of the panel lines layer.
this fact makes arguing about not using antialiasing on the curved or slanted lines themselves before making the layer transparent kind of ironic.
-
Blending options are not the same as anti-aliasing. The shade of my pixels may be altered based on the color beneath it, but the pixels and their relative transparency to others on the same layer remains the same.
-
forrest for the trees.
your talking about method.
the end result is the same.
-
Negative. AA bleeds out different pixels at different transparencies to give the illusion of a smooth line over a jagged grid. Non-AA blending gives you a jagged line but fades the colors. It's not the same result and not the same method. Neither is perfect for what we need them to be (panel lines), but they're by no means the same.
-
Originally posted by Citabria
I can blow your whole jagged lines don't use antialiasing theory out of the water with one simple fact.
everyone uses transparency for single pixel lines to make them look thinner. this is a form of antialiasing using transparency to reduce size.
antialiasing a slanted or curved line is no different when you think about it. makes no difference if 1 pixel or 2 are used when you are using 10-20% fill or opacity every single line curved or not is antialiased regardless.
Good point.
-
Panel lines redone with Anti-Alienated on Mr. Spock.
Final review before submittal.
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_A.jpg)
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_B.jpg)
(http://www.4thfg.org/Fencer/404_C.jpg)
-
Looks beautiful fencer!
Well done.
-
Looks great, Fencer. Really like the texture of the paint- looks worn and faded.
I don't have any decent P-47 resources - but a question about the wing tip nav lights - did they have clear lenses with red and green colored bulbs? Or shold the lenses be shaded?
-
fencer, i know it sounds really pathetic for my opinion to change so much over just panel lines, but that skin is just perfect now IMO. looks absolutely gorgeous! wtg! :aok
i think the reason AA makes such a difference is that the weathering and skin shading just fades really well into AA panel lines.
i definitely have a new jug skin, great job :)
-
Oboe I will check my references and get back to you on that.
Thanks All.
-
No worries, I did some checking on airliners.net, and they seem to be clear plastic lenses - you can see right in to the metal structure inside the wing.
An example (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/Republic-P-47D-Thunderbolt/1288478/L/)
-
Originally posted by oboe
No worries, I did some checking on airliners.net, and they seem to be clear plastic lenses - you can see right in to the metal structure inside the wing.
An example (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled/Republic-P-47D-Thunderbolt/1288478/L/)
Yeah I did the same thing. I wanted to take a look at the WW2 era photos too though. Looks like they had a small red or green bulb inside there. I think I will go as depicted.
Also I did pick up the largish underwing light that was missing when originally depicted above.