T
tigisfat
Guest
You already know which side of the fence I'm on. Here's why, and it's hard to plead a case against it:
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
T
tigisfat
Guest
Some sure do move, just like any hand-painted model. Only occasionally do you see a shiny spot that doesn't move. Besides, can't one start photoreal and then edit out imperfections? I'm for overall realism. I'll take almost the almost perfect color selection and realistic looks of photoreal with a few FSX functions not working perfectly than take FSX functions working but with cartoon painted aircraft.
I'm glad I'm not a payware painter. It must be a nightmare getting the colors even remotely close. Most of the pros are pretty good, but some do get it wrong from time to time. Captainsim is an example of who gets it right. Their large aircraft feel large in the sim. Most large FSX aircraft don't feel large at all because the paint is cartoony.
If someone redid the outside of that great new connie model and also re-textured the VC, I'd be all over it. I don't think they're done poorly, but that particular product doesn't meet my minimum standards for payware gee-whiz good looks.
I'm glad I'm not a payware painter. It must be a nightmare getting the colors even remotely close. Most of the pros are pretty good, but some do get it wrong from time to time. Captainsim is an example of who gets it right. Their large aircraft feel large in the sim. Most large FSX aircraft don't feel large at all because the paint is cartoony.
If someone redid the outside of that great new connie model and also re-textured the VC, I'd be all over it. I don't think they're done poorly, but that particular product doesn't meet my minimum standards for payware gee-whiz good looks.
I admit I'm rather uneducated when it comes to painting, having only done some minor tinkering with the "by hand" process.
Could spec and bump maps not be applied over the photoreal texture or would this ruin the photo effect?
Personally I like both but prefer the hand painted versions as they fit better with my background scenery. I did just get my first photo scenery so the photoreal paints may fit better while flying that area.
Personally I find comparing them is like comparing the Mona Lisa to a photograph like Steve McCurry's Afghan Woman
Similar outcome but different form of art. Both are impressive when done well.
Could spec and bump maps not be applied over the photoreal texture or would this ruin the photo effect?
Personally I like both but prefer the hand painted versions as they fit better with my background scenery. I did just get my first photo scenery so the photoreal paints may fit better while flying that area.
Personally I find comparing them is like comparing the Mona Lisa to a photograph like Steve McCurry's Afghan Woman
Similar outcome but different form of art. Both are impressive when done well.
You know me - paint. 
As Kevin said a few posts up PR can look good in screenies, but you can do a lot of useful stuff with a great paintkit, bumps and specs. I am still on a learning curve, but I have just played with some 30° rotation colour-shift spec to give a different metallic effect to a grey-toned surface...
Subtle, but when you swing around in sim, the hue shifts have an interesting effect.
...and the NYPD paint uses a zero colour rotation but simply a darker shade of blue for the spec.
I do admire those who can get a photo texture right - I find it rather fiddly - especially on "busy" paints where the model is mapped to several viewing angles.
Oh - colour rotation? Your average Photoshop typ program has a HSB tool menu where you can spin the hue values around the "colour circle" - standard daylight, painted metal, is best with a 180° rotation of Hue, -50% Saturation, +50% Brightness. The rest is experimenting and fun...
PS - that face job above is fantastic - Now if ever that guy decides to paint planes...
As Kevin said a few posts up PR can look good in screenies, but you can do a lot of useful stuff with a great paintkit, bumps and specs. I am still on a learning curve, but I have just played with some 30° rotation colour-shift spec to give a different metallic effect to a grey-toned surface...
Subtle, but when you swing around in sim, the hue shifts have an interesting effect.
...and the NYPD paint uses a zero colour rotation but simply a darker shade of blue for the spec.
I do admire those who can get a photo texture right - I find it rather fiddly - especially on "busy" paints where the model is mapped to several viewing angles.
Oh - colour rotation? Your average Photoshop typ program has a HSB tool menu where you can spin the hue values around the "colour circle" - standard daylight, painted metal, is best with a 180° rotation of Hue, -50% Saturation, +50% Brightness. The rest is experimenting and fun...
PS - that face job above is fantastic - Now if ever that guy decides to paint planes...
Au contraire...
http://www.mcphatstudios.net/index....w&catid=8&id=7981&limit=15&limitstart=15#8260
The McPhat UHDT artwork is an example where photoreal doesn't have anywhere near as much detail.
http://www.mcphatstudios.net/index....w&catid=8&id=7981&limit=15&limitstart=15#8260
The McPhat UHDT artwork is an example where photoreal doesn't have anywhere near as much detail.
Y
yago9
Guest
This is not a subject to tickle anyone in a bad way because everyone is correct..Why ? The beauty is a relative thing,and how someone well put it : " It,s in the eye of the beholder ".
I like them both when are well done..Sure you need someone heavy skill like Leo,brush to get close to the Afghan Woman photo quality, wich I do doubt, i,ve seen many in the FS worls using the limited photoshop to come close on reproducing the real thing..We like things that "tickle" us regardless of the rational beyond it,.Trying to understand that, it,s usless
... One cames to mind ,my favorite FS artist, Pierre Lheureux.I wish he would hang around SOH with us.
Some men like fat womans, some don,t...some are driving proudly a brand spanking new a wird colored Pontiac AzteK out of the lot, some are mortified by that view and ask why God ,why someone in the right mind would spend tens of thounsand on such monstrosity ?
Did you never ask yourself why someone would like somothing that you find horrible ? I,m doing this very moment..
..just kidding,i,do like beer
I like them both when are well done..Sure you need someone heavy skill like Leo,brush to get close to the Afghan Woman photo quality, wich I do doubt, i,ve seen many in the FS worls using the limited photoshop to come close on reproducing the real thing..We like things that "tickle" us regardless of the rational beyond it,.Trying to understand that, it,s usless
... One cames to mind ,my favorite FS artist, Pierre Lheureux.I wish he would hang around SOH with us.
Some men like fat womans, some don,t...some are driving proudly a brand spanking new a wird colored Pontiac AzteK out of the lot, some are mortified by that view and ask why God ,why someone in the right mind would spend tens of thounsand on such monstrosity ?
Did you never ask yourself why someone would like somothing that you find horrible ? I,m doing this very moment..
..just kidding,i,do like beer
jankees
SOH-CM-2026
Quicksand
SOH-CM-2023
Very well said, Yago. It all comes down to what we find as appealing according to our own tastes. Each method has its merits, and I guess that would put me sitting squarely on top of the fence in this case. If I seeone that looks good to me, it will end up in my sim pretty quick. I have not seen many that did not appeal to me thus far. They are all works of art, pure and simple.
I like and prefer the photo real paint schemes over the others. The shine points do not move, but they are more real.
However, I also prefer FS2004 over FSX though as well. :d
6 of 1, half a dozen of another. My thoughts are, if you dont like the repaint, dont install it. But, again, thats only my own thoughts.
Bill
However, I also prefer FS2004 over FSX though as well. :d
6 of 1, half a dozen of another. My thoughts are, if you dont like the repaint, dont install it. But, again, thats only my own thoughts.
Bill
Henry
Retired SOH Administrator
Totally agree
H
Just a passing thought before I run away sharply
Has anyone considered the legalities of photoreal - after all, the photos you chop up are copyrighted to the photographers...
Do I care about copyrights when I do paints? Actually yes - sort of. I often try to make contact with the real world owners of paints I do and those that I do reach have all (except for Pirelli) said yes to my artwork. No - it's not a 'holier than thou' aspect I am touching here, rather that I have built up an interesting network of real plane owners who I can use in a 'name dropping' session. But where liveries are in the public domain (US official stuff, for instance - Army, Coast Guard, Air Force, Police...)
If I tried to contact all the airliners.net photographers (sic.) I'd probably not get much done.
....duck, whoosh, runawayyyyyy
Has anyone considered the legalities of photoreal - after all, the photos you chop up are copyrighted to the photographers...
Do I care about copyrights when I do paints? Actually yes - sort of. I often try to make contact with the real world owners of paints I do and those that I do reach have all (except for Pirelli) said yes to my artwork. No - it's not a 'holier than thou' aspect I am touching here, rather that I have built up an interesting network of real plane owners who I can use in a 'name dropping' session. But where liveries are in the public domain (US official stuff, for instance - Army, Coast Guard, Air Force, Police...)
If I tried to contact all the airliners.net photographers (sic.) I'd probably not get much done.
....duck, whoosh, runawayyyyyy
Y
yago9
Guest
Just a passing thought before I run away sharply
Has anyone considered the legalities of photoreal - after all, the photos you chop up are copyrighted to the photographers...
Do I care about copyrights when I do paints? Actually yes - sort of. I often try to make contact with the real world owners of paints I do and those that I do reach have all (except for Pirelli) said yes to my artwork. No - it's not a 'holier than thou' aspect I am touching here, rather that I have built up an interesting network of real plane owners who I can use in a 'name dropping' session. But where liveries are in the public domain (US official stuff, for instance - Army, Coast Guard, Air Force, Police...)
If I tried to contact all the airliners.net photographers (sic.) I'd probably not get much done.
....duck, whoosh, runawayyyyyy
if bring your plane into a show exhibit and let people take pictures of it ,how can that be a copyright violation of any sort..I use my own photos in most cases..And even if not, how can you make your legal point in court,and proof it was your picture in any way shape or form over a FS model ? Specialy on a free toy for fun only..Why would you do that or proof anything ? Not in a million years..You just make a fool of yourself ,waist of time and money..It was a guy not long ago whom released a payware Photoreal Bell Cobra with borrowed photos ,he had no worries on doing so..How can you proof what photos he used and how he got the hands on them..you just cant.
Quixoticish
Charter Member
Just because it can't be proved doesn't make taking other peoples pictures and using them without permission any less wrong.
Just a passing thought before I run away sharply
Has anyone considered the legalities of photoreal - after all, the photos you chop up are copyrighted to the photographers...
....duck, whoosh, runawayyyyyy
Pretty sure Chris was refering to copyrighted photographs taken by others. Might be wrong though...