Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Custom Skins => Topic started by: Vraciu on March 05, 2014, 07:57:58 PM
-
Ugh...
Okay so I have tried my best to create a rivet and panel line bitmap to overlay my master image with later... Two questions came up.
1) Is a bump map *REQUIRED*?
2) Is the bump map supposed to be offset in some manner or is it exactly the same as the texture bmp?
I am worried I spent half my life drawing in all these lines for nothing. :O
-
Ugh...
Okay so I have tried my best to create a rivet and panel line bitmap to overlay my master image with later... Two questions came up.
1) Is a bump map *REQUIRED*? No
2) Is the bump map supposed to be offset in some manner or is it exactly the same as the texture bmp? Same place.
I am worried I spent half my life drawing in all these lines for nothing. :O
-
I don't even touch the bump map for my skins. It's not required and I will most likely mess it up worse than it already is. The bump map is what gives the plane depth when it's enabled (rivets look like they are standing up, panels look stacked etc).
The specular map on the other hand, I always try to modify. This is what gives the plane it's shiny appearance. This should line up exactly with the plane.bmp file.
-
I don't even touch the bump map for my skins. It's not required and I will most likely mess it up worse than it already is. The bump map is what gives the plane depth when it's enabled (rivets look like they are standing up, panels look stacked etc).
The specular map on the other hand, I always try to modify. This is what gives the plane it's shiny appearance. This should line up exactly with the plane.bmp file.
Funny, because I do the opposite.
The bump maps are kind of funny though. Sometimes the effect is reversed, where a part that you intend to appear raised is instead indented, and sometimes even if displaying the correct elevation, it may not react to lighting in the correct way: I.E. highlighted portions facing away from light source.
That said, when the effect works properly, which is the norm, the results are stunning and can really make a skin outstanding.
Here's a visual example of the benefits of the bump maps, from my 109E. Look that the bumps on the upper and lower engine cowlings, as well as the reinforcement strip above the wing. There are no true 3D shapes for those bumps but purely the effect of the bump map on a flat surface.
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/Aces%20High/Jg5Emil_zps05fda98c.png~original) (http://s241.photobucket.com/user/DropkickYankees/media/Aces%20High/Jg5Emil_zps05fda98c.png.html)
-
Such a fantastic skin :D
-
Such a fantastic skin :D
I definitely need to learn how to flatten the paint out like that. Wow.
-
I definitely need to learn how to flatten the paint out like that. Wow.
It is a sweet piece of work
-
I definitely need to learn how to flatten the paint out like that. Wow.
Plug these numbers into your materials file:
0.259,0.259,0.259,1.000,Ambient
0.741,0.741,0.741,1.000,Diffuse
0.000,0.000,0.000,1.000,Emissive
0.208,0.208,0.208,0.000,Specular
33.420,Power
-
Plug these numbers into your materials file:
0.259,0.259,0.259,1.000,Ambient
0.741,0.741,0.741,1.000,Diffuse
0.000,0.000,0.000,1.000,Emissive
0.208,0.208,0.208,0.000,Specular
33.420,Power
Thanks. Will try it.
Another issue. This plane is also too shiny I trust...
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,357987.msg4775049.html#msg4775049
-
Funny, because I do the opposite.
The bump maps are kind of funny though. Sometimes the effect is reversed, where a part that you intend to appear raised is instead indented, and sometimes even if displaying the correct elevation, it may not react to lighting in the correct way: I.E. highlighted portions facing away from light source.
That said, when the effect works properly, which is the norm, the results are stunning and can really make a skin outstanding.
Here's a visual example of the benefits of the bump maps, from my 109E. Look that the bumps on the upper and lower engine cowlings, as well as the reinforcement strip above the wing. There are no true 3D shapes for those bumps but purely the effect of the bump map on a flat surface.
(http://i241.photobucket.com/albums/ff252/DropkickYankees/Aces%20High/Jg5Emil_zps05fda98c.png~original) (http://s241.photobucket.com/user/DropkickYankees/media/Aces%20High/Jg5Emil_zps05fda98c.png.html)
Dude, that is a beautiful skin.
-
Thanks. Will try it.
Another issue. This plane is also too shiny I trust...
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,357987.msg4775049.html#msg4775049
Those numbers will work for the basic materials file. For your skin I definately recomend making a specularity map. The painted parts should be on the flat side, but keep a bit of shine for the bare metal.
Dude, that is a beautiful skin.
It is a sweet piece of work
Wow.
Such a fantastic skin :D
Thanks.
-
Those numbers will work for the basic materials file. For your skin I definately recomend making a specularity map. The painted parts should be on the flat side, but keep a bit of shine for the bare metal.
Thanks.
Let's say I make the entire spec map black. Will it apply an equal amount of "flat" to the entire plane?
My skin viewer keeps crashing when I try to go into the MATERIALS tab to adjust it for a preview of what the effects will do...
-
Let's say I make the entire spec map black. Will it apply an equal amount of "flat" to the entire plane?
yes
-
The spec map was the best part of that update.
A plane is not the same shininess all over. And most of them were a good amount shinier than how we portray them.
The reason that skinners have to do that is that when the entire plane is shiny, it looks ridiculous because the panel lines, extremely dirty parts etc. shine through the same as anything else. You can't capture really interesting nuances like the different reflectivenesses of different paints used on the aircraft. The mattness that preceded them was fine, but with spec mapping you can make planes look a bit spiffier for sure.
Bump mapping and spec mapping are both central in taking your skins to that 'next level', in my opinion.
Unfortunately I got largely out of the game by the time spec maps were introduced, and only ended up playing around with them for a bit, but they're a really amazing tool for skinners to take advantage of, even on planes that don't include bare metal areas.
Also you can do most of the work by for both of them by just taking your original skin, converting it to grayscale, and playing with the colors/saturations of the layers
Also if you modified your panel lines at all from the original and don't change the bump or spec maps it will look stupid
Also if the default spec map takes in dirt/paint differences that aren't in your skin it will look stupid
-
My skin viewer keeps crashing when I try to go into the MATERIALS tab to adjust it for a preview of what the effects will do...
I just tried the P-51D in my skin viewer and it didn't crash. I don't have any custom skins for the P-51D though, only the default. That might be the issue.
The spec map was the best part of that update.
A plane is not the same shininess all over. And most of them were a good amount shinier than how we portray them.
The reason that skinners have to do that is that when the entire plane is shiny, it looks ridiculous because the panel lines, extremely dirty parts etc. shine through the same as anything else. You can't capture really interesting nuances like the different reflectivenesses of different paints used on the aircraft. The mattness that preceded them was fine, but with spec mapping you can make planes look a bit spiffier for sure.
Bump mapping and spec mapping are both central in taking your skins to that 'next level', in my opinion.
Unfortunately I got largely out of the game by the time spec maps were introduced, and only ended up playing around with them for a bit, but they're a really amazing tool for skinners to take advantage of, even on planes that don't include bare metal areas.
Also you can do most of the work by for both of them by just taking your original skin, converting it to grayscale, and playing with the colors/saturations of the layers
Also if you modified your panel lines at all from the original and don't change the bump or spec maps it will look stupid
Also if the default spec map takes in dirt/paint differences that aren't in your skin it will look stupid
It's a blessing, I can't wait for HTC to allow updates to old skins so I can rework my B-29 to incorporate this feature. For a visual reference, here is a close up of one a set of skins I've been working on that shows the effect beautifully.
(http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad258/DragonTamer1X/rv8specscreenshot.png)
-
Also you can do most of the work by for both of them by just taking your original skin, converting it to grayscale, and playing with the colors/saturations of the layers
Also if you modified your panel lines at all from the original and don't change the bump or spec maps it will look stupid
Also if the default spec map takes in dirt/paint differences that aren't in your skin it will look stupid
Will try the suggestion on grayscale. As for the panel lines, yes, I have almost entirely obliterated them and done my own. I was told not to copy the original as that's a big no-no. So I am basically re-inventing the wheel which is taking forever--lots of do-overs....
:(
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,357987.msg4775548.html#msg4775548
-
I just tried the P-51D in my skin viewer and it didn't crash. I don't have any custom skins for the P-51D though, only the default. That might be the issue.
Hmmm....
Or it just means my PC sucks!!
My screenshots are so pixelated (they don't look that way in the game but the output file is horrid, which makes me look even worse for my efforts).
-
Plug these numbers into your materials file:
0.259,0.259,0.259,1.000,Ambient
0.741,0.741,0.741,1.000,Diffuse
0.000,0.000,0.000,1.000,Emissive
0.208,0.208,0.208,0.000,Specular
33.420,Power
Can I edit the materials file outside Skin viewer?
-
Can I edit the materials file outside Skin viewer?
should be able to.....isnt it just a text file?
-
Will try the suggestion on grayscale. As for the panel lines, yes, I have almost entirely obliterated them and done my own. I was told not to copy the original as that's a big no-no. So I am basically re-inventing the wheel which is taking forever--lots of do-overs....
:(
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,357987.msg4775548.html#msg4775548
If you're doing a skin that includes bare metal, you absolutely, 100% need to do your own spec map
Can I edit the materials file outside Skin viewer?
Yeah it's just material(s?).txt in the skin folder
-
Yes, it's just a text file that sits inside the skin folder you are working with. It's worth noting that if the text file doesn't exist in the skins folder, then any changes you make to material properties in the skin viewer will not be saved (at least that's how it used to be).
There should be 2 material files and they should be named as follows:
material.txt This is for when bumpmap and specmap are disabled.
bumpmat.txt This is for the material properties when bumpmap and specmap are eneabled.
Both files affect the overall look of the plane (can't be adjusted for a specific part).
-
I don't even touch the bump map for my skins. It's not required and I will most likely mess it up worse than it already is. The bump map is what gives the plane depth when it's enabled (rivets look like they are standing up, panels look stacked etc).
The specular map on the other hand, I always try to modify. This is what gives the plane it's shiny appearance. This should line up exactly with the plane.bmp file.
After much experimentation I am leaning toward this thinking. It seems that whatever BUMP effects I put in are either unnoticeable or way over-the-top. The exception being the anti-glare panel and the spinner. The bump map REALLY helps flatten those out nicely.
Where I am at a loss is how much depth should each panel have. A Mustang is flush riveted with subtle waves in the panels. I don't see how I can duplicate that without it looking like a cartoon. So frustrating.
(http://www.crazyhorseap.be/Mustangs/Aces/GeorgePreddy/Preddy02.jpg)
-
The bump map REALLY helps flatten those out nicely.
Remember, the BUMP map does not alter the shine. That is the SPECULAR map.
-
Remember, the BUMP map does not alter the shine. That is the SPECULAR map.
Well, when I applied black to my BUMP map it made the color of the OD on my nose flatter... It has some affect on it, no?
-
Are my bumps supposed to be slightly off center?
-
I've noticed that the Skin Viewer doesn't seem to match with how the bump maps are rendered within the actual game. IE, stuff that appears inverted from some angles in the skin viewer (sunken panel lines appearing raised, etc.) render just fine in the game itself.
The viewer is nice for a quick look, but I'd double-check how it appears in the game itself before making any adjustments.
-
Vraciu, did you insert a copy of the main skin as a layer in the bump and spec maps to check everything is lined up? What the bump mapping does is to create highlights and shadows where a bump would be. So a recessed horizontal panel line on the side of the fuselage would have a white line below it and a dark line above assuming the light is coming from above. So in that respect the bump map effects are always slightly offset to the skin objects they are simulating.
Personally I don't like heavy bump mapping on planes. If you look out the side of the cockpit and see overdone highlights and shadows moving around the panel lines on the top of the wing as you maneuver it just looks unrealistic. So I turn down the effect by reducing the last number in the bump map text file to around 0.025 or 0.03.
For aircraft the specularity map is a far more useful effect, particularly for bare metal. Heavy bump mapping looks a lot better on GVs.
-
Vraciu, did you insert a copy of the main skin as a layer in the bump and spec maps to check everything is lined up? What the bump mapping does is to create highlights and shadows where a bump would be. So a recessed horizontal panel line on the side of the fuselage would have a white line below it and a dark line above assuming the light is coming from above. So in that respect the bump map effects are always slightly offset to the skin objects they are simulating.
Personally I don't like heavy bump mapping on planes. If you look out the side of the cockpit and see overdone highlights and shadows moving around the panel lines on the top of the wing as you maneuver it just looks unrealistic. So I turn down the effect by reducing the last number in the bump map text file to around 0.025 or 0.03.
For aircraft the specularity map is a far more useful effect, particularly for bare metal. Heavy bump mapping looks a lot better on GVs.
I did. Traced it in grayscale as you suggested. They line up as best I can see.
-
Then its probably just the bump map effect creating off-centre highlights and shadows as I suggested above.
-
Then its probably just the bump map effect creating off-centre highlights and shadows as I suggested above.
:aok