Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Custom Skins => Topic started by: Vraciu on March 27, 2017, 01:01:28 PM
-
I have noticed that a lot of NMF Mustang pics show silver (white) flush rivets overall with only a few dark ones here and there. Is there a hard/fast rule on this?
Most of mine are a variation of gray. Am I more accurate to go back and turn them all to white?
-
I imagine it is all relevant to the viewing angle off the light source.
I use a darker color as it also represents the grime collected in the rivet head.
-
I imagine it is all relevant to the viewing angle off the light source.
I use a darker color as it also represents the grime collected in the rivet head.
When you get a minute, take a look at the default P-51D and weigh in on it if you have any thoughts...
-
I threw this together really fast by converting some rivets to white and dialing down the panel line opacity until they were barely visible. Will have to move them off the panel line layer to darken those back up.
Thoughts?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=386153.0;attach=27216)
-
I think its a good idea to have rivets and panel lines on separate layers, for the reason you are exploring right now.
In this picture I see both light and dark rivets. Devil might be right that its a function of lighting and view angle, but at least in this case those are held constant and yet we hav both light and dark. I also think it might be a function of the age/weathered state of the rivets - I think older rivets are darker, but no positive.
(http://i.imgur.com/TYvtlBO.jpg)
It also seems like the grime is around the rivet head, making the head seem lighter by contrast.
-
Thanks, Oboe. Good example photo, as usual. <S>
Well, perhaps with Jo-Baby I will stick with the dark gray for now and move on to MOLLY. I can try the lighter rivets there. If it works out better I can always come back to this one.
I have a few days yet to get this one in for the update so there's still time to convert it if that's the play we all agree on.
Panel lines prob could use some darkening with the lighter rivets. Compare...
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=386153.0;attach=27218)
-
Ok, that image was from modern day museum, and the aircraft had not had much work done to it. Here's a photo of a bare metal '51B - brand new. The rivets seem light:
(http://i.imgur.com/ibcsp1m.jpg)
-
I would say big thing when it comes to rivets in general is don't make them uniform in any way. These are not planes right off the show room floor they are weathered, beaten and generally worn from time and maintenance. I used similar standards when working with paint but also focused on areas that were known to have more wear and tear creating the illusion of chipping paint at walking areas, dirt both in dark and white coloring dependent on the color of paint below and even the theater of operations that particular plane was operating out of during the war. For bare metal good thing to remember is it's not polished metal, it should have evidence of random scratches and dull metal in some areas. I used a cloud effect on one of my layers so it would affect the paint and metal to give that random dulling effect and wear. It's not about perfect lines or rivets and I can tell you that from my years of working in the aviation industry on military aircraft. Position means everything but how they visually appear should not be perfect and uniform. Oil, fuel, hydraulic fluid and many other things will discolor and change the paint overall so take good looks at examples and try to mimic them.
-
I like the bottom pic. It has a good balance to it.
-
I like the bottom pic. It has a good balance to it.
Those are the white rivets.
-
I would say big thing when it comes to rivets in general is don't make them uniform in any way. These are not planes right off the show room floor they are weathered, beaten and generally worn from time and maintenance. I used similar standards when working with paint but also focused on areas that were known to have more wear and tear creating the illusion of chipping paint at walking areas, dirt both in dark and white coloring dependent on the color of paint below and even the theater of operations that particular plane was operating out of during the war. For bare metal good thing to remember is it's not polished metal, it should have evidence of random scratches and dull metal in some areas. I used a cloud effect on one of my layers so it would affect the paint and metal to give that random dulling effect and wear. It's not about perfect lines or rivets and I can tell you that from my years of working in the aviation industry on military aircraft. Position means everything but how they visually appear should not be perfect and uniform. Oil, fuel, hydraulic fluid and many other things will discolor and change the paint overall so take good looks at examples and try to mimic them.
Thanks for the input. :salute
-
I like the bottom pic. It has a good balance to it.
Am I still doing a highlight and shadow with the 1 pixel blur?
-
Yes.
-
My taste is the top. Feels more like hi def clarity to me in that particular shot. Then again we have lighting effects to play with here. Completely different scenario, but the airliners I work with have imperceptible rivets until light hits it just right and then they reflect "white". I'm experimenting with dark for color and white on light maps on the NMF 38s,, not at a happy place to post yet :embarrassed:
On weathering I subscribe more to timeline perspective. If the airframe in question just arrived in theater it will look a little more factory fresh than a snapshot for a skin on an airframe that's been around a few years beat to hell by combat. Also, and this just may be my anal retentiveness, is thinking about aircraft system locations. For instance, a 109 wouldn't have hydraulic fluid on the wings since there were no hyraulic systems in there, except for the landing gear itself. I would post an example of the weathering technique I've used but it would be irrelevant to AH's engine and you would have probably found something that works before I finish my 38 project :)
-
Fairly knackered but they're still white in many places.
(http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa242/_Exocet_/38thFSP-51D44-13923BigBeautifulDollCG-OColour_zps296d6ad8.jpg)
:headscratch:
Jo-Baby is fairly clean.
Molly is shown for comparison.
Many of these birds were kept pretty clean considering...which makes the decision all the more difficult to nail down.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=386153.0;attach=27220)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=386153.0;attach=27222)
Perhaps I should stick with the gray for Jo-Baby and try the white for Molly...
-
There's an aesthetic that says you have to put rivets on. There's also the reality that in most planes you wouldn't see them or even notice them. Unless they're dome-headed rivets (and yes, some planes had them *shudder*) you really don't need them on a skin. Using museum pieces beat and stressed over 60 years isn't a very good indicator. Looking at period-era photos and references is better.
What you're experiencing is the group think that "you need to put rivets on!" -- and I've felt that pull before as well. In the end I've weighed the historical reality vs the "player expectation (even if unrealistic)" and leaned toward the latter. You will have to give a little introspection and decide which route you will lean towards, then strike a balance between reality and expectation that works.
Rivets should always be on their own layer, separated from panel lines. Panel lines are arguably more noticable and should be tweaked differently. However, having rivets on their own allows a lot more blending options with regards to spec map, bump map, layering over BMF, over paint, or separating BMF from pain (like combo P-51 skins). I go a step further and then also add a bolts/screws layer separate from rivets. You notice those more, like along the wing root fairing on that P-51 in the picture.
For my feedback: If you're going with rivets (and it looks like you are) the top option in your side-by-side comparison looks a lot more natural. The bottom option looks like the shadow and highlights on the rivets got reversed. I'd stay with the top method.