WIP: stuff you are working on!

[Sennacherib 0]

@nephilim, damn' i like very your idea. these guys are excellent.

btw the last one resembles Dimitri Lukin.

@plaintiff.

how many faces/tris for the hull? I'm just curious. btw great marder

[max power 21]

The object that represents most of the base hull is 1200 polies or so.

[opteryx 1562]

Okay, thanks for the previous reply to my building.

Now I've made a few more, they look a bit monotonous, but I'm learning! Anyway, I spoke to a certain "pro" and he said that the textures were too saturated, what are your thoughts on this guys?

Also, any simple tips/suggestions on what to add on them?

Picture

[max power 21]

The problem with the textures in that image isn't the amount of saturation itself, in my opinion, it's that the image looks flat because there is little tonal range, especially in the middle.

There is a really weird thing going on with that image because you have dark buildings with contrast in the foreground, dark buildings with contrast in the background, but in the centre you have building with little contrast within themselves, between themselves, or with the ground. The result in the difference between those building and the ones around them tends to make them pop out, accentuating their flatness.

For those buildings in the centre it looks (and probably quite rightfully so) that those buildings are a base texture surrounded by more complete buildings. Also, having some ambient occlusion style darkness or grime near the bottom of a building helps ground it... the buildings in the centre that lack contrast seem to be floating there.

The brick texture you're using seems a bit repetitive... which is also being accentuated by the flat tonal range of the building textures.

I would recommend that you intersperse those tan buildings with some different ones, increase the contrast within the buildings by darkening the trim, and putting grime on the buildings in a more logical way... ie. more grime closer to the bottom. Ambient occlusion passes really help this because dirt and crap tends to collect in the crevices and valleys on objects... so like, in the space around a window sill, etc. And decrease the amount of grime on the wide open spaces on the walls.

[-HUNTER- 1]

Okay, thanks for the previous reply to my building.

Now I've made a few more, they look a bit monotonous, but I'm learning! Anyway, I spoke to a certain "pro" and he said that the textures were too saturated, what are your thoughts on this guys?

DUUDE!!!

That looks awesome, is that ARMA, looks like VBS more then ARMA. That screenshot alone gives me 120932 mission ideas. Keep this look and feel if you ask me.

Perhaps you can add certain places on the buildings where you can shoot from good cover, but still maintaining a good angle on things.

Also think about making ledges at good height so machine gunners look like theyve got their bipod on the wall. Thats basicly the right angle aswell.

[opteryx 1562]

The problem with the textures in that image isn't the amount of saturation itself, in my opinion, it's that the image looks flat because there is little tonal range, especially in the middle.

There is a really weird thing going on with that image because you have dark buildings with contrast in the foreground, dark buildings with contrast in the background, but in the centre you have building with little contrast within themselves, between themselves, or with the ground. The result in the difference between those building and the ones around them tends to make them pop out, accentuating their flatness.

Indeed, this is a problem for me at the moment getting the new "desert" style buildings to blend in with default ArmA structures, hopefully I'll be able to produce enough custom structures to filter out standard ArmA ones.

For those buildings in the centre it looks (and probably quite rightfully so) that those buildings are a base texture surrounded by more complete buildings. Also, having some ambient occlusion style darkness or grime near the bottom of a building helps ground it... the buildings in the centre that lack contrast seem to be floating there.

Well spotted, I didn't really notice that. I've been thinking about adding accumulated dirt at the base to prevent illusion of "floating", however it isn't easy when using same texture for multiple floors. Maybe make an independent texture for base?

The brick texture you're using seems a bit repetitive... which is also being accentuated by the flat tonal range of the building textures.

Any Photoshop tips here? I know that the "match color" ->"color intensity" function in PS can add a wider tonal range, but I've experienced textures ending up a bit 'cartoony' with that. Also, any good texture resource site recommended? Currently I use www.cgtextures.com.

I would recommend that you intersperse those tan buildings with some different ones, increase the contrast within the buildings by darkening the trim, and putting grime on the buildings in a more logical way... ie. more grime closer to the bottom. Ambient occlusion passes really help this because dirt and crap tends to collect in the crevices and valleys on objects... so like, in the space around a window sill, etc. And decrease the amount of grime on the wide open spaces on the walls.

If it's not too much to ask, care to elaborate on what "Ambient occlusion passes" means? I'm a bit weak on this terminology.

Anyway, appreciate the suggestion, I will try to the best of my abilities to implement your ideas.

-edit-

Perhaps you can add certain places on the buildings where you can shoot from good cover, but still maintaining a good angle on things.

Also think about making ledges at good height so machine gunners look like theyve got their bipod on the wall. Thats basicly the right angle aswell.

Yes this is something I've been trying to do, default ArmA structures have very low walls/ledges covering the rooftops unlike what we see in Iraq. I try to make them somewhere between waist/chest height.

[nephilim 0]

@Opteryx

well you cant really do much about repetative textures than to correctly layout the buildings uvs and place your textures in an optimal way. they have a good tonal range.

maybe some more darker spots here and there, an AO pass and voila.

also change the color spectrum for each building.

just try to get rid of that uniformity.

an ambient occlusion pass is somehing quite nifty.

the 3d application will create a 360° light all around the object and the cast shadow will sink into all the nooks and cranies of the object, thus making it look dirty (not technically spoken...... just to give an overal picture).

if you blend it over your existing texture, it will give it a nice boost.

[opteryx 1562]

@Opteryx

well you cant really do much about repetative textures than to correctly layout the buildings uvs and place your textures in an optimal way. they have a good tonal range.

Yeah, that's the tricky part. Learning new stuff every day though.

maybe some more darker spots here and there, an AO pass and voila.

also change the color spectrum for each building.

just try to get rid of that uniformity.

Good idea, for some reason I always end up with the same brownish hue.

an ambient occlusion pass is somehing quite nifty.

the 3d application will create a 360° light all around the object and the cast shadow will sink into all the nooks and cranies of the object, thus making it look dirty (not technically spoken...... just to give an overal picture).

if you blend it over your existing texture, it will give it a nice boost.

That sounds really clever, too bad I only am capable of operating Sketchup at the moment.

[max power 21]

For an assignment today I had to do a render of my tank. Since it has no texture to it yet, I had to do some cheap photo-chop (copyright Nephilim) crap to mock it up. It's just a plain green texture, like you saw earlier. I guess this would constitute a concept of the kind of colour scheme i will do for the low poly model. I'm pleased with the general look. We'll see what my professor has to say about it.

Click on the image to be lead to a higher resolution image.

[Commando84 0]

Nice stuff guys! Love the buildings opteryx! Try to do what Nephilim sugested and they can become really great with some tweaking around with AO.

I got Maya in school and i done some AO's yesterday and it gave me a hard time but i can show you some pics of difference with and without AO later on tomorow!

[sakura_chan 9]

@Opteryx

you could simply use the same textures as the default buildings, they would fit in with the other buildings and they already have normal/spec maps. I also hope they are enterable

[mrcash2009 0]

Off of AA info news page ... boeng 737-800 from Microsoft FSX imported to Arma .... man check out the cockpit detail !!! ....

But I doubt this will ever get officially released

If this is a repeat post im sorry.

[Kristian 47]

Off of AA info news page ... boeng 737-800 from Microsoft FSX imported to Arma .... man check out the cockpit detail !!! ....

But I doubt this will ever get officially released

If this is a repeat post im sorry.

why not?

the model is finished, all it needs is few scripts, exture tweaking and little changes to the flying config, but model, lods etc are done! I so I do belive that this addon shall rise and shine! (like gordon freeman )

[nephilim 0]

Ever heard of the word copyright?

So if it should "rise and shine", the, i say ripper, will get his arse kicked by microsoft.

[RN Malboeuf 12]

there was a bunch of ripped models released for ofp/arma. from CS, CoD, LockOn etc.  just browse through ofp.info carefully )

I doubt there'll be too much troubles in this case.

[MontyVCB 0]

Off of AA info news page ... boeng 737-800 from Microsoft FSX imported to Arma .... man check out the cockpit detail !!! ....

But I doubt this will ever get officially released

If this is a repeat post im sorry.

I'm sure the Flight sim community love to have their work raped and ported into a game for which the models are not suited for.

[usmc123 1]

Okay, thanks for the previous reply to my building.

Now I've made a few more, they look a bit monotonous, but I'm learning! Anyway, I spoke to a certain "pro" and he said that the textures were too saturated, what are your thoughts on this guys?

tell me that's not IMWM exclusive. TELL ME IT WILL BE STANDALONE!!

[max power 21]

there was a bunch of ripped models released for ofp/arma. from CS, CoD, LockOn etc. just browse through ofp.info carefully )

I doubt there'll be too much troubles in this case.

Two wrongs, Astanid. Besides, BIS is more proactive when it comes to copyrights now.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Isn't it still common for ArmA weapon models to be taken

from "Counterstrike"? I've seen it mentioned here in

several places that certain addon-artists "get their

weapons from CS".

[Maddmatt 1]

Isn't it still common for ArmA weapon models to be taken

from "Counterstrike"? I've seen it mentioned here in

several places that certain addon-artists "get their

weapons from CS".

Getting permission from modders to use their stuff is a completely different thing to just illegaly ripping stuff from other commercial games.

The CS stuff that I know of was used with permission from the CS modders that made them.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Getting permission from modders to use their stuff is a completely different thing to just illegaly ripping stuff from other commercial games.

The CS stuff that I know of was used with permission from the CS modders that made them.

Ok, it was never clear from context that that was the case. Fair enough.

[-HUNTER- 1]

there was a bunch of ripped models released for ofp/arma. from CS, CoD, LockOn etc. just browse through ofp.info carefully )

I doubt there'll be too much troubles in this case.

Two wrongs, Astanid. Besides, BIS is more proactive when it comes to copyrights now.

Gosh, I wonder how that all got started?

At first I was uber excited that people released a vulcan bomber for ARMA.

A half hour after my first flight with it, I enthusiastically wanted

to talk to others about this addon and I got confronted with the facts.

Which made me because If somebody actually earns money with this addon,

its not supposed to be ripped.

BUT

Quote[/b] ]When I will get permission from Microsoft to relase free for all add-on for ArmA imported from FSX, then I will start working on it.

Atleast he is aware of this, and hopefully (I doubt it though) he will get permission from microsoft.

Is this addon made by microsoft themselves?

Carefully whispers that I dont have FSX.

Because personally even if this was a grey box with this cockpit in it.

It would have been enough for me to be flying this for hours on end.

However Im not too sure how the arma engine will handle this kind of uber elite cockpits

with all the buttons and levers and switches and gadgets actually modelled. If all those MFD's will also be working

that is great.

*Questions himself about why he hasnt bought FSX, decided to go to the stores tomorrow.

[mrcash2009 0]

If you check the video his specs are at the end and aren't too great and its flying well, Not sure what that would be like with working anims internally etc though.

It would be nice to see this out, it might not, it proves that hi def cockpits seem to work anyway.

Quote[/b] ]*Questions himself about why he hasnt bought FSX, decided to go to the stores tomorrow.

LOL ... guess what, I was thinking the exact same thing

[Blue_Flight 0]

Hunter,

are you aware that the Vulcan from CheyenneAH56 was converted to ArmA with full author´s permission?

That model was indeed addon made for FSX, but as long as there is permission to convert it to ArmA or other games, then that should be fine.

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Quote[/b] ]When I will get permission from Microsoft to relase free for all add-on for ArmA imported from FSX, then I will start working on it.

Oh, that's OK then. I asked to do this too and Microsoft sent

this reply:

"Yes, of course you can rip our FSX stuff and distribute it

free for some other company's game. Here, have a million

bucks too as a gift. Love, Bill"