View Full Version : Ivan!!!

October 12th, 2009, 07:16
my sincere and humble apologies
for forgetting to post Birthday Greetings.
better late than never, I guess.
I hope you had a Great Day with the family.

October 12th, 2009, 10:11
Happy Birthday Ivan...I missed it too:applause:

October 12th, 2009, 11:25
Belated Happy Birthday!!!


Better late than never.

BTW- I've been watching your tutorial on painting but, so far, I've refrained from any comments. Our techniques are so different that my input would only blur your demonstration. Keep the good work, Ivan.

You too, G.I. Joe:kilroy:...

October 12th, 2009, 12:34
Thanks guys!

B'day was slow which is the way I wanted it.

- Ivan.

October 12th, 2009, 14:54
Hey Hubbabubba,
If you don't want to interrupt the other thread, why don't we discuss your alternative method here? I don't claim my method is the ONLY way, it's just a method I am reasonably satisfied with.

- Ivan.

October 12th, 2009, 22:19
Hey Hubbabubba,
If you don't want to interrupt the other thread, why don't we discuss your alternative method here? I don't claim my method is the ONLY way, it's just a method I am reasonably satisfied with.

- Ivan.

Since I'm working with SCASM now, I'm no longer limited by AF99. To position textures, I use EOD, a macro design program. Specifically, the texture functions. I then copy-paste what EOD makes of it in SCASM code.

The jeep and St-Leu church were both made entirely that way.

Your method is better for those who want to paint within AF99 framework... and constraints.

It doesn't stop the 3D "skewing" of textures though. I do apply about the same technique to correct the situation, but I also move the texture drawings, depending on "what's work best" criteria.

I was curious to know if you do the same - move the drawings instead of the coordinates' limits - if needed.

P.S.- Feel free to answer here or in your tutorial thread. I will read both!

October 13th, 2009, 03:38
Hi Hubbabubba,

As usual, we have differing methods on doing the same thing. (No surprise there! ;-)

I do realise that SCASM has its advantages in that anything you can do via AF99, you can do via SCASM, but the fast cycle times for rebuilds and views in CFS is why I stay with AF99 for things I can do there. I also don't like the idea of a design baseline that isn't graphical.

Don't worry, this project WILL go SCASM for the 3D Virtual Cockpit eventually and possibly breaking parts (combat damage) and such.

If I understand you correctly, I do my best NOT to alter the texture file. The left wing is supposed to be a mirror of the right wing for the most part. There may be a position light or a fuel filler or insignia that is different, but the basic wing should be the same and not skewed by a pixel or two. Also, I don't see how I can align the wings differently with altering the texture because the scale of the pixels is so large. There is 15 feet of wing textured by a 256 pixel bitmap which means that the least I can move it with a texture is 0.05859375 feet. With altering the limits in AF99, I can move it 0.01 feet and actually can go a bit more precise than that by altering the 15 feet / 256 pixel scale to something like 15.01 feet / 256 pixel. This doesn't affect anything else because the wing has its own texturing scale anyway.

- Ivan.

October 13th, 2009, 10:26
Hello Ivan:wavey:

We are not that different, after all...

I do modify textures, but seldomly. If it is a "fine tuning" job, as it is usually, I will adjust the coordinates in the SCASM lines or through copy-pasting new coordinates from EOD.

But I don't let symetry prevail over visual rendering. Right and left projections are not equal. It is more observable in top-bottom cylindrical views (normally; fuselage) painted from the side. One of the two - if memory serves me, the left one - will prevail.

And SCASM can do little about it, it is an algorythm "hard coded" in the smoothing process.

October 13th, 2009, 12:33
Hi Hubbabubba,
Your advantage here is that the actual units you are working in are the ones that are used to generate the model. With us in AF99, we are working in 0.01 Feet and that gets translated to 1/512 of a Meter. When you make an adjustment, you know it will show up. When we make an adjustment, it may or may not show up if it is within the rounding error in translating units.

I believe what you are describing is what happens with a left-right texture applied to a part that is flat either on top or the bottom. I ran into that with my first aircraft project. These days, I just never have a fuselage, nacelle or whatever that has a flat on the top or bottom.

Even my Fokker Eindecker which would have been the perfect flat top / bottom aircraft has a peaked top and bottom though at a very shallow angle to avoid what you are describing. It can still be seen in all the square section wheels I tend to use.

- Ivan.

October 13th, 2009, 20:13
I just gave this example among others to show the fact that projections are not done equally. You are right in saying that up-down horizontal textures are not receiving the same treatment.

But, when you do it, one side prevail over the other.

BTW, this could be corrected using a different call command to apply the texture.

Smoothing is also done in an unequal fashion. When applying a "grid" texture, I would not get the same results on both sides.

I will probably have to re-experiment on that to be more precise. Next time, I will take note...:icon_lol:

And I must admit that I never considered the 0.01 limitation. But you're right, SCASMing is far less limited in that sense. But it does not preclude a lot of "trials n' errors" system.

October 18th, 2009, 19:00
FWIW, I don't know what the default texturing command is that AF99 uses or what the alternate command would be.

For the trial and error approach, I ran about 15 build and observe cycles to align the textures on the belly component. The engine for sure needs a revisit. I have already done about 20 cycles on that and am no closer because I am not documenting what each parameter change does.

I have always wanted to change the scaling within the same texture in SCASM: Use one texture to cover both the side and top (slightly angled like on the Eindecker fuselage) and be able to draw something on both surfaces.

I actually did that when adjusting textures on a Heinkel 51 that had the wings built asymmetrically. The point there was making the effect unnoticeable or close to it. The end result was a different scale on the main part of the wing and the wing tip, but the change was so gradual that unless you were counting ribs and locations, you probably would not notice.
I was SCASMing someone else's model to see if I could fix things.

- Ivan.

October 19th, 2009, 04:48
Happy Birthday!

October 19th, 2009, 13:16
Thanks MiamiEagle.