Mapping the wing-to-template

[OleBoy]

I'm ready to create templates. Before begin there's one thing that comes to mind based on how want to, or "should" do this for best results. The more thought process I put into it, the more it shouldn't really make a difference as long as I lay things out right. However, I think one might have a slight advantage over the other.

My wing span is 36 feet. I plan on making the template 38x38ft.

Should I;

*1- Map entire Wing TOP, Wing BOT to span the full width of the template,
or
2- Map Left wing TOP/Left wing BOT, Right wing TOP/Right wing BOT and then stack as needed on the templates.

I like option one. Will it work alright?

 

[hairyspin]

I'm ready to create templates. Before begin there's one thing that comes to mind based on how want to, or "should" do this for best results. The more thought process I put into it, the more it shouldn't really make a difference as long as I lay things out right. However, I think one might have a slight advantage over the other.

My wing span is 36 feet. I plan on making the template 38x38ft.

Should I;

*1- Map entire Wing TOP, Wing BOT to span the full width of the template,
or
2- Map Left wing TOP/Left wing BOT, Right wing TOP/Right wing BOT and then stack as needed on the templates.

I like option one. Will it work alright?

You're the painter Don, which would you rather paint? I went for option 1 myself. My model's wingspan was 39 feet and I made my template 42 feet square, so seems good.

 

[Milton Shupe]

In my opinion, you should start with a different question.

What texture size do I want to use in FSX? For FSX, let's assume 4096 for fidelity.

Then there is that second question:

What scale size should I map to for conformity in detail resolution consistent among major body parts. (i.e. How many pixels per inch minimum do I need?, and I want that same resolution across major body part maps)

Generally, painters will like it best if the wings, fuselage and empennage are of the same scale. With that done, panel lines and rivets will all be the same size over the whole aircraft. You might include leg struts, wheel pants, and any other sheet metal in that scale.


So, the new question should be based on level of detail required to satisfy the appearance of rivets and panel lines, and that should be sufficient for lettering and markings.


So decide if a 1" panel rivet of 9, 16, or 25 pixels is the minimum required.
Assume a rivet is 1" in diameter, and you want at least 16 pixels to make a good rivet.
16 pixels per inch is 192 pixels per foot.
A map size of 38' times 192 pixels per foot, you have 7296 pixels to cover your wings to get the resolution you want.
So, a 4096 X 4096 template will not cover the wing using option 1. You would have to use option 2.

Now assume that with 9 pixels, you can make an acceptable looking rivet.
9 pixels per inch is 108 pixels per foot. Map size of 38' times 108 pixels is 4104 pixels.
At 38', you have 4104 pixels and that does not work with a 4096 X 4096 sheet either.

But, if you mapped it using 37' (11.227 meters), it would work (3996 pixels).
And, you could put the fuselage and htail on the same sheet easily.

Generally, you want to map to the smallest size possible to get the highest resolution and that is why I stack the wings on a smaller texture sheet. But, maintaining the same UVWMap size across the fuse, wings and tails is also important. On larger aircraft, you may also want to split the fuselage in half.


(I made the mistake of using different scales for years, i.e. not using the same scale for wings that I use for the fuselage, and likely different for nacelles and tails. Thanks to Paul for pointing that out to me.)

 

[OleBoy]

In my opinion, you should start with a different question.

What texture size do I want to use in FSX? For FSX, let's assume 4096 for fidelity.

I've considered stepping the template up. It can always be scaled down. Not up and still retain the details.

Then there is that second question:

What scale size should I map to for conformity in detail resolution consistent among major body parts. (i.e. How many pixels per inch minimum do I need?, and I want that same resolution across major body part maps)

Generally, painters will like it best if the wings, fuselage and empennage are of the same scale. With that done, panel lines and rivets will all be the same size over the whole aircraft. You might include leg struts, wheel pants, and any other sheet metal in that scale.

This also came to mind as I laid out the template. The wing, fuselage, and tail surfaces were the only ones I considered. Although now that you mention it, it makes sense scaling major parts up. In my case I'll increase the scale of everything so I can add as much detail as possible. Testing as I go, and changing as needed.

So, the new question should be based on level of detail required to satisfy the appearance of rivets and panel lines, and that should be sufficient for lettering and markings.


So decide if a 1" panel rivet of 9, 16, or 25 pixels is the minimum required.
Assume a rivet is 1" in diameter, and you want at least 16 pixels to make a good rivet.
16 pixels per inch is 192 pixels per foot.
A map size of 38' times 192 pixels per foot, you have 7296 pixels to cover your wings to get the resolution you want.
So, a 4096 X 4096 template will not cover the wing using option 1. You would have to use option 2.

Now assume that with 9 pixels, you can make an acceptable looking rivet.
9 pixels per inch is 108 pixels per foot. Map size of 38' times 108 pixels is 4104 pixels.
At 38', you have 4104 pixels and that does not work with a 4096 X 4096 sheet either.

But, if you mapped it using 37' (11.227 meters), it would work (3996 pixels).
And, you could put the fuselage and htail on the same sheet easily.

Generally, you want to map to the smallest size possible to get the highest resolution and that is why I stack the wings on a smaller texture sheet. But, maintaining the same UVWMap size across the fuse, wings and tails is also important. On larger aircraft, you may also want to split the fuselage in half.


(I made the mistake of using different scales for years, i.e. not using the same scale for wings that I use for the fuselage, and likely different for nacelles and tails. Thanks to Paul for pointing that out to me.)

This is all good information to consider, Milton. I wasn't looking at laying out the templates with the information you share here in mind. But I will now.

My template layers have been ready to go for ages. Now it's time I start pulling things together. And I've gotten the mesh back on the wing and displayed as a painted surface. At least I'm making some progress.

Thanks Milton!