[napalm]

Try adding some dirt and "damage" to the texture maps, they are too clean and perfect, real life is anything but. Also it looks as if the brightest light comes from the bottom left here, realistically during a day flight the main light source (the sun... would be above the object of course. A great start though, keep workin!

------------------
[email protected]
me: http://www.deadzebra.com / my crew: http://www.creators.org my master nick.com

[Gecko]

Brightness/contrast struck my eyes as well. Looks like it would need more those.

Desaturate, yes.

------------------
Gecko
[email protected]
GeckoArt.Net

[OkkE]

Wow, yeah, that looks photoreal to me! But, ummm.. dont want to be a pain in the a$$ but.. could be just me... but where's the 2nd engine? on the left side of the pic? it looks to me that there should be a part of the left engige.. or am i wrong?
well other than that its a very nice and photoreal pic!

[edit]
oh, wait. now i see how it works. there isnt any 2nd engine, my mistake.
[/edit]

[This message has been edited by OkkE (edited December 20, 2000).]

[dd]

wow
well it must be only me cause i think this picture kicks butt
why cant you see that
maybe its my monitor or my eyes

skyraider keep it up m8 it rocks

[Skyraider]

Thanks for the comments sofar!

This is how the real thing looks (no second engine - yes it's asymmetric!!)



Desaturize more!?

That's a pretty saturized sky imho... (ps. colors on this aircraft are not the same as on my model! This one is grey, mine is green)



------------------
I mess up all the time, big time...

www.skyraider3d.com

[Freddio]

I was looking at your modekl and thinking what the? its not symetrical

I c now

nice work

wired plane

[Freddio]

Plugin Jockey at work

i played around with a few things... although now it looks more like a ww1 photo...

[Skyraider]

RUN FOR COVER!!!!
=)

------------------
I mess up all the time, big time...

www.skyraider3d.com

[balistic]

I added bloom, some finer grain, and adjusted the levels a bit. I did a curve that flattened the darks down to black, and raised the midtones some to make it look aged.

One thing that I see missing in your texture maps, aside from grime, is obvious rivetting. I think that if you find some close photos of WWII-era aircraft, you'll see rivets along most of the seams, with areas of chipped paint around them.

Nice model . . . you're about 80% of the way to photoreal.



------------------
"What we're hearing, techno, is the process of trying to create something of the future." - J.M.

Brian "balistic" Prince
3D Artist
Eggington Productions
www.bprince.com

[balistic]

Hey Freddio, Just for accuracy's sake, your motion blur isn't quite right. Firstly, in order for the wings to blur that much, they'd have to be moving as fast as the tips of the propeller . . . and the tips of many props can do better than 700 miles-per-hour.

Also, motion blur should occur on both the leading and trailing edges of an object, not just the latter. Check the propeller to see what I mean.

Just thought I'd be picky, since he's after accuracy Your level tweaks are quite nice.




------------------
"What we're hearing, techno, is the process of trying to create something of the future." - J.M.

Brian "balistic" Prince
3D Artist
Eggington Productions
www.bprince.com

[dd]

dd here so how many ppl feel qualified to mess with others works well 2 i guess if you are so fecking good please post your work here and show us your stuff instead of ruining the pic from skyraider

some one once did this to mine and it really pissed me off
askk first before or show your own example

skyraider i am sorry but this is bad news
i know let me take the pic some one has taken ages on and show how to make better well you didnt so modell your own

[Skyraider]

Yeah DD, looks like my pic is being gangbanged here

Sorry gents - I keep it at the orginal!

By the way... flush rivets are very hard to spot on photographs. I have hundreds of them and I don't see them... Just panellines. Same goes for chipped paint.
FYIO, this machine never saw operational use except for trials. So please don't ask me to make bulletholes and stuff

------------------
I mess up all the time, big time...

www.skyraider3d.com

[This message has been edited by Skyraider (edited December 20, 2000).]

[Freddio]

DD, you silly little man
we are only trying to help and its not as if we are trying to take credit for Skyraiders work...

DD: I have many pieces in development ill show you some of my stuff when im done....(I would like to see some of your stuff)

Actually id say that the motion blur is more correct than inccorect...

many factors could of incured this motion blur... eg shutter speed and how fast the other plane carrying the camera was travelling.

so this plane may have been going 300 miles an hour

and the plane with the camera is going 280 (obviously the speeds are very poor estimates) miles an hour so therefor when the shutter is open the plane would have moved further by the time it had shut... thus incurring motion blur...

but I see what you mean about the propellor well that needs more motion blur

anyway It gives a sense of speed and motion.

[This message has been edited by Freddio (edited December 20, 2000).]

[dd]

fred
i am a fool well i have done 3d for four years and only once has some one done this
it is you that is the fool
you should never retouch someones work
did you ask i think not
and also did they make it better i think not
i have photos to prove they made it worse
if you have a point then make it dont change someones work to suit you
it aint professional or ethical
copyright you know thou shalt not copy or alter work done, you know
so make the comments and then let them make the changes dont do them your self you self prentious mf
show your work to the artist and prove your worth


here is some of my work and remember i never altered his work so it is you that should prove

not me
http://www.stormvision.net/user_gallery/index_artist.cfm?user_ID=26

[This message has been edited by dd (edited December 20, 2000).]

[Freddio]

obviously a newbie

[dd]

what i am new cause i didnt like the way you changed his work
yeah right
i have been designing for 6 years and doing 3d for over four so yeah i am a newbie
http://tailslide.firelight.dynip.com/images/b-17-flying-fortress-3.jpg
COOL LOOK AT ALL THAT MOTION BLUR ON THIS PHOTO FRED YOU WERE RIGHT I WAS WRONG YOU DID A GOOD JOB

NOOOOOOOOOT

[This message has been edited by dd (edited December 20, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by dd (edited December 20, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by dd (edited December 20, 2000).]

[Skyraider]

Easy guys...



Btw... aircraft speed alone is completely irrelevant. I've photographed on airshows a lot, and often I get sharper pictures with hi-speed action then of bi-planes.
This one was a good hit, although it was underexposured (weather sucked).
Anyway, I thought I'd show some motion blur too...

------------------
I mess up all the time, big time...

www.skyraider3d.com

[Starseed]

DD, you silly fool.

Sorry, but I completely agree with Freddio and balistic.

Coming here and asking for critique means ppl are looking for ideas and help. The best way to teach is by showing. And this is the truest probably when it is in regards to art.

Also, both renditions IMPROVED the picture. It was too perfect before, and the lighting unrealistic. The model is excellent, but the things they changed were the things that needed improvement.

For someone who has been doing 3D for 4 years, you have the maturity of a young brat who just got his hands on a cracked 3d program and is overprotective of his work. No one is stealing work here, they are offering their time and expertise to help others work get better.

-mt

[balistic]

dd, you obviously haven't been here very long . . . one of the AWESOME things about this board is that the people here actually care enough about helping you to show you how to improve your work. Nobody's trying to steal his picture, we're just trying to illustrate things he could do to make it more photorealistic, rather than clumsily describing the process with words.

If you're not cool with that, then this probably isn't the board for you. As for my knowledge of photorealism:





(high res of these are available at my site)

3D photorealism is my "bag", and I was trying to help Skyraider out. This is often how things are done among artists. Its a compliment.

------------------
"What we're hearing, techno, is the process of trying to create something of the future." - J.M.

Brian "balistic" Prince
3D Artist
Eggington Productions
www.bprince.com

[This message has been edited by balistic (edited December 20, 2000).]

[A.Buttle]

dd, mellow. They were only trying to help by example. It's pretty hard to show some one on a bulletin board without giving an example.

------------------
Larry Flint's right! You guys suck!

Joe Dillingham
[email protected]
Three Times A Day

[dd]

starseed
young brat yeah right
i have no crack software
and i never once said they steel his work or glory
and yeah i am over protctive about my work and so are others
if you spend weeks on a visual and then see some one that doesnt even ask change it
without proving that he has the qualifications to do so
then yeah this gets me down
also i understand that the person post work here to get advice but tell them dont do it
what is the point
and i still fell that the picture is far better than the two that changed it

[dd]

balistic
remember my freind how your picture yeah the one showed here was in the mag
yeah welll i do to
nice work by the way
and now remember how you then wrote to the and complained how they chjanged the cropping of the picture
well what do you know a protective artist and a 3d one at that
point rested

[Skyraider]

I appreciate you guys took the time to look seriously at my image, but I do NOT think it improved my picture. I didn't meant it to be blurry, nor did I meant it to be badly exposured. So Starseed I think it's a bit insulting to state that adding motion blur or messing around with the colorization improves the picture.

I know the lighting is off. The background image was a quick replacement for the computer generated background I had earlier on.

Balistic, nice picture. Warped metal plating is very good. Sand needs more work. Some extra details would be nice too. Just my opinion. I won't change your image


------------------
I mess up all the time, big time...

www.skyraider3d.com

[Nex]

Freddio, just for the protocol, I really like your version up there. In fact I stared at it for some time to figure out how you made that.
--

strange.. first they call "help! fire" and when the firemen come they complain that they could have asked before they let the water go?

[dd]

nex
what ?????

[balistic]

One thing just occurred to me: Your bumps are probably too deep. Take a look at the seams in the paneling on the bottom of the engine cowling . . . those gaps look half-an-inch deep, which suggests thick armor plating instead of aluminum.

[Skyraider]

balistic - that's the first time I heard someone saying the bump is too deep!!
I agree totally! I usually never use bump like that on a plane. Planes are way too smooth for those seams. But then artists go like "you need bumpmapping!", so I did. ...Mistake?

------------------
I mess up all the time, big time...

www.skyraider3d.com

[balistic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dd:
balistic
remember my freind how your picture yeah the one showed here was in the mag
yeah welll i do to
nice work by the way
and now remember how you then wrote to the and complained how they chjanged the cropping of the picture
well what do you know a protective artist and a 3d one at that
point rested

---

But I didn't ask 3D World Magazine for suggestions on how to improve the work.

Its a flake magazine run by a flake company with a monthly editorial by a notorious flake. I should've done my research before I submitted my art to them. Its like sending your painting to gallery and having them cover a third of it with duct tape.

Give it a rest mate, the vast majority of this board likes visual critique. If it bugs you, sod off.

Edit: removed the term, "dumbass"


------------------
"What we're hearing, techno, is the process of trying to create something of the future." - J.M.

Brian "balistic" Prince
3D Artist
Eggington Productions
www.bprince.com

[This message has been edited by balistic (edited December 20, 2000).]

[Lukias]

Right I know jack shit about 3d but this does not hinder my judgement in what I know looks realistic.

The blurring done by Freddio *does* I repeat *does* make it look far more realistic.
Though I'm not entirely sure what your after. I think the original is fantastic and I was blown away when i saw it, after viewing the the photos and Fredio's attempt, his is definitley closer to photo realism. Going from photo's to yours, it makes it alot more obvious we're looking at a digitally rendered piece......I see this as obvious.
But I still think what you've done is excellent.

dd - you'll find that this kind of *take his pic and give it a redo* kind of stuff goes on *alot* here. If this pisses you off now then you'll be vomiting anger in a while.

[balistic]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Skyraider:
balistic - that's the first time I heard someone saying the bump is too deep!!
I agree totally! I usually never use bump like that on a plane. Planes are way too smooth for those seams. But then artists go like "you need bumpmapping!", so I did. ...Mistake?

---

I would tone the bump map down . . . maybe you could even try a diffuse or specularity map instead.