Cessna 140 released

[pilto von pilto]

Here is full res picture with outside texture with MipMaps direct from the sim - a lot of better I suppose (I converted it as example):



The quality is +100% and only 5Mb more (16Mb to 21Mb). The best way is to do all outside texture and inside. The rest (like PBR, bumps) is ok. Only shell textures. Pretty please.

As I said in my email. You are using enhancements to tweak P3D. The Cessna is built to a common stock P3D. To build a cessna to work on your system may/will break it for others. Therefore if you want to add mip maps to all your textures for personal use ... by all means do it. However due to the vastly disparate systems out there ( both from performance as well as capabilities wise ) most developers will choose the most common configurations. Compromising certain aspects for a broader appeal.

An increase of 5mb per texture might not seem like a lot to someone who is running a good system however for someone like me who doesnt have a good system that texture load onto the video card would have a dramatic effect on frame rates. I hope you understand that in your case the fixes that you prescribe may work. For others it wont.

If you tweak your system then the onus is on you to understand what you have done should a circumstance arrive where something doesn't work as advertised.

 

[62stratfan]

There's a bit more to it than that but this is the simplest way to explain it I think.

OK, all that does make sense. How do you make the yellow/green dds? Is there a plug-in or a process in the paint program? If we can't make the appropriate dds's, then trying repainting is going to be pointless.

Many Thanks,
62stratfan

 

[pilto von pilto]

OK, all that does make sense. How do you make the yellow/green dds? Is there a plug-in or a process in the paint program? If we can't make the appropriate dds's, then trying repainting is going to be pointless.

Many Thanks,
62stratfan

Heres the pbr material SDK from Lockheed martin.

http://www.prepar3d.com/SDKv4/sdk/modeling/3ds_max/modeling/modeling_pbrmaterials.html

If you want to do a repaint then those are the parameters needed.
The pertinent part for the yellow green is :
Metallic Map : that determines the metallic nature of the material. The metallic map must also contain a smoothness map and potentially an ambient occlusion map. These need to be packed in the following channels: R = Metallic, G = Occlusion, B = Empty, A = Smoothness.

Do a search for "packed RGB" online will show up some plugins for photoshop or standalone programmes that can combine for you. Beware some follow the UE4 method of packing which puts the metal/rough into a different channel. Or you sit in photoshop with 3 images open and the fourth is the empty M map and you copy the metal into the red channel of the blank , the shadowing into the green of the blank( I would use ours as that is the shadowing and I dont think you're going to change that ) and a smoothness into the alpha channel of the blank document. Time consuming but do-able.

Funny really but around 8 months ago we had this discussion where I said that repainters are going to have trouble with repainting pbr due to the packed nature of textures... yeah people laughed at me back then. I actually think that PBR repaints wont be as prevalent as FSX repaints but again that is an unpopular opinion.

If you want to do a re-skin then all you need to do is to repaint the diffuse texture and dont need to worry about the _m texture at all. If you are doing a chrome one then use the chrome _m maps. etc.

 

[62stratfan]

Many thanks, pilto von pilto. That actually sheds quite a bit of light on this (up to now) obscure topic. I think I'll give it a try, but it may be more trouble than it's worth. No one should have been laughing, however, as your prophesy is likely coming true!

Besides, as near as I can tell, the metal/wine example has no N or NC number anywhere on it. We can't have that!

Best,
62stratfan

 

[YoYo]

As I said in my email. You are using enhancements to tweak P3D....

Hi pilto von pilto,
thx for reply here because I didnt recive email with reply.

Ok, I'll ask more people about this issue (FSX corner and Avsim) but I cant agree - "its only Your problem".

PTA didnt affect antialiasing (I'll do test with default shaders and back here to You, no problem) and as I wrote before - I havent this antialiasing problem on the other models and with AH models also before He-111.

You changed a saved option and I havent idea why ; ) (A2A uses MipMaps for textures also as many developers , You can check also C140 of AH and C170 of Carenado <- here is ok).

This doesnt look good for me, lines with 4xSSAA looks very askew and model "flickers" for me if You change the angle of view:

and MipMaps can solve it.

 

[pilto von pilto]

Can you ensure that you allow aeroplaneheaven based emails through to your account. I will resend my response.

 

[YoYo]

At some angles canopy looks like without windshield (external only). Just idea to improve this part of texture (and You can do this - example He-111 ) .



Tested 1.0v.

I did small tweak for canopy, it's more visible from now for me:

Link: https://www.sendspace.com/file/km4s9k .

 

[bazzar]

You appear not to be using the latest version.

 

[YoYo]

You appear not to be using the latest version.

Yes, in PCAviator still 1.0 .

 

[bazzar]

we'll chase them up.

 

[YoYo]

Ups, it looks like alien attack from the back . Strange, in 1.0v is ok.

 

[pilto von pilto]

One of 'those' irritations that I haven't been able to sort out.
Checked the light setting in the cfg and I can either have them on or off, but I can't tone them down.
The beacon is annoyingly bright and very red in daylight, at dusk it's really bad.
Thoughts please.
And yes, I would prefer to use their support as I purchased my 140 from Just Flight, updated a day or so ago, but this will most likely get me a faster answer.

Wombat : It's a stock effect on an attachpoint. Fx_beacon.fx .

yo-yo : As for it being fine in v1.0 .... it hasnt changed it has always been the stock fx_beacon. If you are seeing changes since v1.0 ... what has changed? Not our attachpoint or it's settings.

Everyone : The issue ( and I have brought this up in the hotfix announcement ) is that 4.5 changed the shaders and rendering methods... or at least it seemed to here. So on my stock 4.4 the beacon is fine. On the 4.5 test rig the stock beacon it's blown out. So do we now need to make effects per point release? Or do we hope that LM gets a hustle on and get 5.0 out and we can all calm down a little. I mean seriously a stock beacon from 4.4 acting correctly and then in 4.5 it doesnt? Oh and what if you are running an enhancement like tomatoshade/PTA or rex enhanced lights ? Are we sure that those tweaks are done correctly and are considered correct for 4.4 or 4.5 or 4.5+hotfix?

It's a minefield. A major problem IMO as it pertains to other possible issues. Make an effect per point release of a simulator and a model ( as it has to have different attachpoints ) per point release of a simulator is going to add time/money and possible bugs to a development. Which is going to increase the fragmentation of the market. We are already seeing people buying PBR 4.4+ releases and trying to run them in 4.1 or 4.2 which didnt have it. Now you will need to know if you have pbr and if you are running 4.4 or 4.5 or 4.5+HF or 5.0 ( in the future ).

I'm probably being over-dramatic. It's cold here and I really want to sit on the sofa with some hot tea and play some doom.

 

[YoYo]

yo-yo : As for it being fine in v1.0 .... it hasnt changed it has always been the stock fx_beacon. If you are seeing changes since v1.0 ... what has changed? Not our attachpoint or it's settings.

I have only C140 1.0v and P3Dv4.5 + hotfix1 and its ok on my spec with this bacon light.

 

[wombat666]

Thanks for taking the time pvp.
Good point that.
Incremental tweaks by LM would be annoying for developers if they produce aggro even in minor ways.
Easy enough in this case for me, I'll just turn the beacon off.


"I'm probably being over-dramatic. It's cold here and I really want to sit on the sofa with some hot tea and play some doom."
I think we'll have plenty of Doom to go around once ScoMo and his lot return to Canberra.

 

[pilto von pilto]

Thanks for taking the time pvp.
Good point that.
Incremental tweaks by LM would be annoying for developers if they produce aggro even in minor ways.
Easy enough in this case for me, I'll just turn the beacon off.


"I'm probably being over-dramatic. It's cold here and I really want to sit on the sofa with some hot tea and play some doom."
I think we'll have plenty of Doom to go around once ScoMo and his lot return to Canberra.

Thanks mate. Yes a move-able flightsim that during point release updates changes large areas and makes significant changes that either break previous fixes/hacks or deletes certain functionalities ( There's no more usercontrolled night lighting in PBR without a lua hack ) is not really a workable thing. But as I have said multiple times. Why does LM care ? Their primary purpose for the sim is training in a specific way. They dont need to keep consumers ( ooops I mean academic students ) happy. So we work with what we have. As long as the community - and most do - understand that these limitations are often out of 3rd party developers hands it's all good.

scomo vs albo. It sounds like a bunch of sesame street characters.

 

[bazzar]

The world is Sesame Street isn't it? We've got ScoMo, Albo, Bojo (Mayo goes this weekend) and Trumpy . Furry little friends all of them and they're all worked by somebody else's hand up their bottoms. Just wish they were all as harmless...

 

[wombat666]

At least we still have a sense of humor to keep on keeping on.
Looks like 'Boris' is going to complete the set.
Cue Benny Hill theme.

 

[Lee Mumbower]

140

Just, got back from Sullivan Lake Meteline Falls and Ione Washington were I grew up flying my Cessna 140 from Airplane Heaven, I forgot that I'm a old man for awhile thanks to the Cessna 140! Thank you for making this great plane! Lee

 

[bazzar]

Thankyou Lee, glad you're enjoying it. That's what it's for.

 

[62stratfan]

So glad AH made this for us. It's a delight. I have P3d v4.5 with the C140 update and don't find the beacon objectionable. I wonder what's up? Also, support has been great. Please build some more of these post-war era light planes (PA-12, Stinson 108).
Many Thanks,
62stratfan