Metallic Reflection on Camo and 3-D Textures

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

I wanted to comment on the use of the metallic reflective quality of surfaces of some of the addons I've been seeing.

I trust that this isn't off-topic in the "Addons & Mods: Discussion" forum?

You SHOULD NOT use that effect on camo'd vehicles that are probably painted with a FLAT paint.  One of the objects of painting a vehicle with FLAT paint in a camo scheme is to reduce the shine and silhouette of the vehicle.  If it has a metallic reflection, it then provides the inverse of a silhouette, a bright outline, to its surfaces.  This makes it stand out while surrounded by natural vegetation and landscape.

You also SHOULD NOT use that effect on textures that are meant to circumvent actually modelling the surfaces depicted in the textures.  For example, if "spokes" in a BMP's wheels are created using a texture, these spokes will practically disappear when the surface produces a high metallic shine across the whole surface in a setting or rising sun.  The result will be a wheel that has almost no 3-D quality to it.

(Bump-mapping seems to provide a way to give a 3-D quality to textures in those kind of lighting conditions.)

The object of camo is to look more natural and less man-made (even men are "man-made").  If you add a metallic reflection to models that are trying to be camo'd, you're undoing the whole process of camo'ing the vehicle.

If you add a metallic reflection to surfaces that have a 3-D texture, all 3-Dness of the texture will practically disappear in the reflection of light given off by the metallic surface.

And for your info, even the green paint job on an A-10 Warthog is there for camo.  That bird isn't meant to shine.

Air Force and Navy birds can afford to shine because they are usually stationed well away from the enemy's reach while they are parked on the ground and because they usually own the skies while they are up in the air.

The A-10, OV-10 Bronco, and birds like these make an attempt to be camo'd.  I can only assume that it is because these birds operate closer to the front lines and at lower altitudes.

Army helos all have "subdued" (i.e., non-reflective camo) paint jobs.

Blued metallic parts on firearms normally have somewhat of a faint metallic shine to their finishes and some black plastics.

[akd 0]

I wanted to comment on the use of the metallic reflective quality of surfaces of some of the addons I've been seeing.

I trust that this isn't off-topic in the "Addons & Mods: Discussion" forum?

You SHOULD NOT use that effect on camo'd vehicles that are probably painted with a FLAT paint.  One of the objects of painting a vehicle with FLAT paint in a camo scheme is to reduce the shine and silhouette of the vehicle.  If it has a metallic reflection, it then provides the inverse of a silhouette, a bright outline, to its surfaces.  This makes it stand out while surrounded by natural vegetation and landscape.

You also SHOULD NOT use that effect on textures that are meant to circumvent actually modelling the surfaces depicted in the textures.  For example, if "spokes" in a BMP's wheels are created using a texture, these spokes will practically disappear when the surface produces a high metallic shine across the whole surface in a setting or rising sun.  The result will be a wheel that has almost no 3-D quality to it.

(Bump-mapping seems to provide a way to give a 3-D quality to textures in those kind of lighting conditions.)

The object of camo is to look more natural and less man-made (even men are "man-made").  If you add a metallic reflection to models that are trying to be camo'd, you're undoing the whole process of camo'ing the vehicle.

If you add a metallic reflection to surfaces that have a 3-D texture, all 3-Dness of the texture will practically disappear in the reflection of light given off by the metallic surface.

And for your info, even the green paint job on an A-10 Warthog is there for camo.  That bird isn't meant to shine.

Air Force and Navy birds can afford to shine because they are usually stationed well away from the enemy's reach while they are parked on the ground and because they usually own the skies while they are up in the air.

The A-10, OV-10 Bronco, and birds like these make an attempt to be camo'd.  I can only assume that it is because these birds operate closer to the front lines and at lower altitudes.

Army helos all have "subdued" (i.e., non-reflective camo) paint jobs.

Blued metallic parts on firearms normally have somewhat of a faint metallic shine to their finishes and some black plastics.

Well, the problem here is that "metallic reflections" are not really added to the models. There is no real specular effect as you would see on a truly reflective surface, but more of an enhanced shading and highlighting creating more contrast.

That being said, it should be possible to reassign textures in the configure materials section of the config to get different effects.

Or maybe you mean people who add artifical highlights to the textures themselves, creating areas of the weapon that are perpetually reflective regardless of the lighting situation (i.e. the pseudo photorealism approach). I agree that this does not look very good outside of screen shots.

[Acacyn 0]

He means...

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">class CfgTextureToMaterial

class CfgMaterials

etc. He is right camo usually doesnt shine

[sanctuary 19]

The "shine" can only be applied to binarized p3d

The "shine" is only applied by defining a texture in the CfgTextureToMaterial to apply the "shine" only to this specific textures.

By example, you have the BIS M16 an XM177 defined by default in the CfgTextureToMaterial (that's why you can see light affecting it , but not most of the other weapons in OFP without addons)

You can see there the textures listed to be affected by light.

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE"> class RifleMetal

{

textures[]={"data\m16_pmp_1s.pac","data\m16_pmp_ph.pac","data\m16_pmp_lod.paa","data\m16_pmp_lod_gif.pac","data\m4_1.pac","data\m4_2.pac","data\m4_miridla.pac","data\xm177_1s.pac","data\xm177_ph.pac","data\xm177_details.pac"};

material="#RifleMetal";

};

};

The "shine" is dependant on the intensity and other setting defined in the class CfgMaterial , for the material name under which the texture is defined in the CfgTextureToMaterial.

By example, if the CfgTextureToMaterial assign the texture to be affected by "RifleMetal" (the line material="#RifleMetal"; up there) , here is an example of what you will see , and can modify in the Material class

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE"> class RifleMetal

{

ambient[]={1,1,1,1};

diffuse[]={1,1,1,1};

forcedDiffuse[]={0,0,0,0};

specular[]={0.2,0.2,0.2,0};

specularPower=5;

emmisive[]={0,0,0,0};

};

So it is very possible to get more realistic light, and having part of a weapon/unit/vehicle supposed to be affected by sunlight being really affected while other cannot.

But there you have a problem : it is a texture that is affected not a model part, as akd said up there, so it can be a problem if a texture file has the different parts of the vehicle instead of having a texture file by a vehicle part , (by example camo part and metallic part inside the same texture file)

And after that, you have to tweak the CfgMaterial part to get the right light , as it is right some actual material are a bit too shiny in that section.

But what is the right light ?

The right light you see at 15:30 on a 20 % humidity level in clear sun in the summer or the right light of a different time or world zone on autmun ?

Or the other right light you see on google photos that are supposed to be real and not photoshopped ?

Or the right light you provide the photo yourself took on a middle of a military base, with your camera adding more light or changing/adapting the light itself , and again, in which weather/sun/climate condition affecting the light ?

Then, you have the help of "everybody's different opinion" on what is good light , what is too much, what is not enough, what to choose between all those opinions, when you too have one ?

As you see, this problem is harder than you think and it would involve a very lot of work that can be more interesting to spend on the model , the config and the textures.

But the beauty of OFP is that you can modify the config youself for your own enjoyement, if you think a texture should be a bit less shiny, modify the class CfgMaterial values.

If you think a texture should not have the light affecting it, just remove it from your class CfgTextureToMaterial.

[vektorboson 8]

And if you want the material to shine white instead of yellow, then use this:

specular[] = { 0.5, 0.5, 1.0, 0.0 };

I like white specular reflection more than that yellowish BIS thing.

[DPS -CCCP- 0]

And using small intensity of reflection is better than 100% ultra shine:)

[meyamoti 0]

Heh yeah,an example I could think of is the Franze apache vs the Mpiv apache,anyone ever played with it (or maybe it was one of the past FFUR or Y2K3..oh well) either way,one of those apaches (and I know because it was original bis modified) when turned at the sun would shine such a bright yellow,and this is the black helicopter,however when comapred to the Franze variant,well thats ones just more correct and blends in well with the enviroment,especially some vietnam maps,I'v found it to be the exact same color as the tree's giving it a very good camoflauge.

[Uziyahu--IDF 0]

My point was not that the reflective quality wasn't of a pleasing degree, but that on flat camo paint jobs or 3-D textures it shouldn't be there AT ALL.

In the first case it wouldn't happen in real-life.

In the second case the detail of the textures totally disappears, leaving you with a completely flat 3-D object of a single color, completely washing away any of the texture's details. (For example, a very small complaint, but in Operation Flashpoint: Elite, the muzzle of one of the M16's loses its hole when the light reflects on the very end of the barrel, breaking what was a very nice work-around to actually modelling the hole.)