FG-1D Corsair Milviz (preview)

stovall said:
More preview pictures of the FG-1D VMF-115 with the white painted area forward of the cockpit. Wonder why they did this during restoration?

FG-1D%20VMF-115.jpg


FG-1D%20VMF-115a.jpg
Click to expand...

Great job on capturing the glossy sea blue and the insignia blue, but the gray/white anti-glare panel is incorrect. The anti-glare panel was the same shade of blue as the glossy sea blue, but was a matte finish instead of a high gloss finish. When the paint was factory fresh, the anti-glare panel was quite visible. As the paint weathered, the anti-glare panel gained a slight gloss and the glossy sea blue dulled to a medium gloss and that made the anti-glare panel almost disappear in photographs.
 
John and standsdds, what you mention makes more sense to me than the light color. Light can really make things difficult to judge the real color. I used the close cockpit photo for the color depicted. It makes much more sense to use the same sea blue color with the alpha and spec changes. Off to get that a try with the results here later today. Really appreciate the help. I know John would know the answer for sure.

The suggested changes really did the trick. Looks very cool.

attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Spec1.jpg
    Spec1.jpg
    79.1 KB · Views: 5
  • Spec2.jpg
    Spec2.jpg
    92 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:
stovall said:
John and standsdds, what you mention makes more sense to me than the light color. Light can really make things difficult to judge the real color. I used the close cockpit photo for the color depicted. It makes much more sense to use the same sea blue color with the alpha and spec changes. Off to get that a try with the results here later today. Really appreciate the help. I know John would know the answer for sure.

The suggested changes really did the trick. Looks very cool.

attachment.php


attachment.php
Click to expand...
Now it looks right!
Great job with the matte anti-glare panel. :applause:
 
Just for further reference/clarification, here are some more photos of the restoration under different lighting/angles of reflection/refraction. In this fresh-state, the flat/non-specular sea blue can almost look like flat black at times, compared to the gloss sea blue, as it is far less saturated blue than the glossy sea blue (and the glossy sea blue is less saturated than the insignia blue - the glossy sea blue also has the slightest tinge of green to it, compared to insignia blue).

All photos of the FHCAM restored FG-1D, under various lighting/angles:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/75957202@N07/35267817324/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/75957202@N07/35299810453/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/51056939@N00/35981777371/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/75957202@N07/36107808015/sizes/l/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/75957202@N07/36107724125/sizes/l/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/woodysaeroimages/35517890245/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/hawgwildterry/35499845866/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/zrxryder/35504016522/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/woodysaeroimages/35517885705/sizes/l
https://www.flickr.com/photos/woodysaeroimages/35478761966/sizes/l

Indoors, the contrast isn't as great between the two different paint types, but of course in FSX/P3D, you want to tune everything to look how it should be outdoors/in sunlight:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rsm-pictures/35030687143/sizes/l

As I mentioned before, all of the paints used on this particular restoration (the latest/most authentic Corsair restoration to-date) are all lacquer-based paints made precisely to match those originally used in 1945.


Here are a number of period photos that you can clearly make out the anti-glare shield/demarcation between the flat paint and the glossy paint:

Factory fresh FG-1D's for the RN: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/18874501331/sizes/l
A fresh carrier-based FG-1D: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/19049015929/sizes/l
FG-1D's state-side: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/18489902549/sizes/l
FG-1D in the Pacific: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/18650367916/sizes/l
F4U-4: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/18469191258/
F4U-4 (in color): https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/33384124434/sizes/l
AU-1 (in color): https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/18645529201/sizes/l
F4U-5: https://www.flickr.com/photos/133697406@N05/35793105824/sizes/l
 
A wealth of knowledge John. I am saving everything for future reference but especially for fine tuning the VMF-115. You have my sincere thanks for all your help. I will post more screenshots for any changes.
 
Josh Patterson said:
Especially when a lot of other planes are being passed over. I'm itching for an Airacobra (which is in the works from Warbird Sim I hear) and would really like a Devastator. Also wish Vertigo Studios would do a Cougar to go with their Panther. Really liking the A-20 and B-26 that is being worked on here. I do understand where the payware companies are coming from though. They won't do a TBD payware because it probably wouldn't sell in as much volume as a more popular plane. (Although that's not even always true. Virtavia just put out an XB-46. (Although I think that was just someone doing it for he love of the plane and saying "Meh, maybe I'll make a few bucks on the side.") Well, they got my money, because I like weird, obscure and unusual!
Click to expand...


Not payware... but I need to finish it!
 

Attachments

  • 10633431_10202732619938881_5481194450446632666_o.jpg
    10633431_10202732619938881_5481194450446632666_o.jpg
    43.3 KB · Views: 0
  • 10669337_10202732620098885_8662320365994556714_o.jpg
    10669337_10202732620098885_8662320365994556714_o.jpg
    34.5 KB · Views: 0
  • 1782365_10202732620458894_4530967046379825661_o.jpg
    1782365_10202732620458894_4530967046379825661_o.jpg
    45.4 KB · Views: 0
Is it just my eyes or does the hydromatic prop dome look too long? For me, it's particularly noticeable compared to the photos of the real aircraft.
 
c87 said:
Is it just my eyes or does the hydromatic prop dome look too long? For me, it's particularly noticeable compared to the photos of the real aircraft.
Click to expand...

I'd say yes.

Looks like it needs to be shortened.

Otherwise, looking very nice indeed!

Cheers

Paul
 
c87 said:
Is it just my eyes or does the hydromatic prop dome look too long? For me, it's particularly noticeable compared to the photos of the real aircraft.
Click to expand...

Good catch, the dome looks about 30% too long but the actual hub is at least 50%+ larger in length and diameter (using Mk.I eyeball) compared to the restored aircraft.
:dizzy:
 
c87 said:
Is it just my eyes or does the hydromatic prop dome look too long? For me, it's particularly noticeable compared to the photos of the real aircraft.
Click to expand...

Indeed it is c87. I'm happy to report that MV team have already fixed this. Thank you for the very good catch!
 
c87 said:
Is it just my eyes or does the hydromatic prop dome look too long? For me, it's particularly noticeable compared to the photos of the real aircraft.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, MilViz started with the Aircraft Factory F4U-1A/C/D model, which had a high number of inaccuracies. I'm not sure if fixing that model was the best plan or if they should have started from scratch.
 
I have good news for Milviz users, this model will have "tooltips". Finally it's solved :very_drunk: .

mHPV2Lf.jpg


amavdom.jpg


2Bk40uz.jpg


WiP.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top