PDA

View Full Version : Outstanding Render of the P40 one day all Aircraft will be like this in games



Taylortony
02-25-2005, 10:05 AM
see http://cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=175989 for more

http://pachome1.pacific.net.sg/~matrox/Kittyhawk_Col.jpg

MEGILE
02-25-2005, 10:09 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Taylortony
02-25-2005, 10:13 AM
it really is a wicked site check this one out but its BIG

http://www.cgnetworks.com/gallerycrits/28755/28755_1099615187.jpg

there is a massive and i mean massive view of it here

http://61.132.72.41/drawx/drawx.net/upload/songbird2004090705.jpg

I CANT TELL IT FROM REAL... IT IS THE BEST RENDER OF A PLANE I HAVE EVER SEEN

Check all of the galeries http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.cgtalk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=121&page=3&sort=dateline&order=&pp=25&daysprune=-1

Chuck_Older
02-25-2005, 10:18 AM
I have to say it is very good


But the plane is too 'slick'.

It looks like a wood carving that is almost perfect, with details painted on. No 3-d feeling except by virtue of it's position


I can see panel lines...but no feeling that there's really a panel there. It just looks like a line

Pilot gave it away to me.

Constructive criticism, be sure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The jet image (Tornado?) looks much superior to the P-40 image, in my opinion. That has a reall feeling of heft and weight that the P-40 lacks, again in my opinion

sunflower1
02-25-2005, 10:19 AM
omg. I wonder how many pixel pipes and mhz we're going to need? I gotta have that.

Aero_Shodanjo
02-25-2005, 10:32 AM
How about Tochy's works?
Here's the link (http://www.angel.ne.jp/~tochy/airplane.htm)

He made several outstanding movies too. Worth downloading.

I wonder just when the technology will give us games/flightsim with that kind of rendering. 5-10 years?

3.JG51_BigBear
02-25-2005, 10:49 AM
That is awesome. Some of the early shots of BOB planes looked like they are going to be a big step up on what we have now. Nothing quite this not just yet but still far more advanced than I would have ever though possible ten years ago.

S 8
02-25-2005, 10:53 AM
What kind of jets are those in Taylortonys links.Looks like some kind of 60-70´s Sukhoi work.Or are those just made up? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

3.JG51_BigBear
02-25-2005, 10:58 AM
Its a Chinese design. NanChang Q-5

3.JG51_BigBear
02-25-2005, 11:21 AM
Nanchang Q-5
The Nanchang Q-5 (NATO reporting name 'Fantan'), also known as the A-5 in its export versions, is a Chinese-built jet fighter bomber based on the Soviet MiG-19. Its main role is close air support

Development
The PRC was an enthusiastic user of the MiG-19, which it manufactured locally as the Shenyang J-6 starting in 1958. In August 1958 the People's Liberation Army requested development of a jet attack aircraft for the air support role.

The J-6/MiG-19 became the starting point, but the new design, designated Qiang-5 (fifth attack design), had a longer fuselage, area ruled to reduce transonic drag and accomodate a 4 m (13-ft) long internal weapons bay. The air intakes were moved to the fuselage sides to make space in the nose for a planned target radar (which was never actually fitted). New wings with greater area and reduced sweep were incorporated. The Q-5 shares the J-6's Liming Wopen-6A (Tumansky R-9 turbojet engines. The redesign costs some high-altitude speed, but the Q-5 is as fast as the MiG-19/J-6 at low level, thanks largely to the area-ruled fuselage.

Fixed armament of the Q-5 was reduced to two Type 23-1 23mm cannon with 100 rounds per gun, mounted in the wing roots. Two pylons under each wing and two pairs of tandem pylons under the engines were provided in addition to the weapons bay. A total of 1,000 kg (2,205 lb) of ordnance could be carried internally, with an additional 1,000 kg externally. On many aircraft the weapons bay is now used primarily for an auxiliary fuel tank.

|Exciter|
02-25-2005, 11:31 AM
DROOL http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

It's overmodelled http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

robban75
02-25-2005, 12:08 PM
Excellent looking P-40. But the FB/PF P-40 looks good too IMO(although not comparable to the above), but with a correct dihedral, it'd be close to perfect! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

woofiedog
02-25-2005, 12:25 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Wow! You can almost feel the Engine Purrring and smell the Gasoline. Mint! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Owlsphone
02-25-2005, 12:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
I have to say it is very good


But the plane is too 'slick'.

It looks like a wood carving that is almost perfect, with details painted on. No 3-d feeling except by virtue of it's position


I can see panel lines...but no feeling that there's really a panel there. It just looks like a line

Pilot gave it away to me.

Constructive criticism, be sure http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The jet image (Tornado?) looks much superior to the P-40 image, in my opinion. That has a reall feeling of heft and weight that the P-40 lacks, again in my opinion <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree that it is really nice. I think Chuck that modern computer graphics really haven't caught up with the little textural things that our eyes see without us noticing. That's why many computer generated images seem 'slick' or like theyre plastic.

I think eventually the CG will get better, but as of now, there is that little something that just tells you it isn't real.

Badsight.
02-25-2005, 01:19 PM
im glad to see someone else here watches CGTalk too as i do

Owlsphone
02-25-2005, 03:53 PM
Here's another pic from that CGTalk site.
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?s=bc10c9e854628d8316d0807b625a2f93&t=189884

Very very nice Mustangs.

Bearcat99
02-25-2005, 05:07 PM
oooooooo that is nice... I agree with Chuck though.. the plane does look too slick.... more panel lines would really set it off... Id love to have that in a sim though... running with about 80FPS with 60 planes plus flak,ships,explosions and men in the mix too.....


Then I woke up.............

3.JG51_BigBear
02-25-2005, 06:41 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bearcat99:
oooooooo that is nice... I agree with Chuck though.. the plane does look too slick.... more panel lines would really set it off... QUOTE]

I think he has the panel lines there they just aren't deep enough to look like a real plane. If he was working strictly off photos I could see that happening easily. Setting it in front of a photo real environment also messes things up a bit. If he had used a more virtual surrounding I think the model would have looked a lot better.

Bearcat99
02-25-2005, 11:20 PM
Rgr... Id like to see that combined with this (http://www.compfused.com/directlink/662/). Maybe in @ ten years.

3.JG51_BigBear
02-25-2005, 11:24 PM
That is insane.