Where can I find high quality "AI" models?

[Guest]

That basically sums it up. Looking for good looks and a slim polygon count.

[Guest]

only one adress:www.projectai.com

[Guest japangg]

Or you can try FSPainter models: fspainter.projectai.com.There are a lot of repaints of FSPainters model here at avsim, or you can try the following sites (most of them are in Japanese)http://homepage3.nifty.com/take723/index.htmlhttp://www.h4.dion.ne.jp/~yonechan/fs/http://www.cam.hi-ho.ne.jp/urakawa-t/http://fs2002-web.hp.infoseek.co.jp/http://www.fs777.com/download/mainpage.htmhttp://www.nasuinfo.or.jp/freespace/yashio...002_fsp_air.htmRegards,Japangg

[Guest]

I'm sorry, you must have misread my question. I said where can I find HIGH QUALITY "AI" models.See what I mean. Therein is my problem.

[Guest]

They are nice, but I need high quality and "AI" models, like both, at the same time. FSP usually doesn't even use LODs.

[KevinAu 441]

Your question is self contradicting.

[Guest]

If you want lowest FPS impact, use PAI models. FSPainter's have more polygons, I think. I use PAI models without the installers, and they significantly raise the old FPS counter.

[Guest]

If you really want to know why I don't use PAI models, get a utility called "AircraftContainerManager" and take a look. Even compared to the default MS models, they are pretty scary and ugly.At least with MS models, you get the looks to back up the FPS cost.Thanks for your input though.

[Guest]

No, you have just been led to believe that it is self contradicting.Any good modeler can combine low polygon count with high visual quality.Some believe that isn't possible. That is the fallacy.More polygons DOES NOT = more quality.Anyone can make an airplane with tons of polygons. That is easy. Only a lazy modeler would leave it at that.

[KevinAu 441]

But you're still not going to find anything else out there. Why don't you design some easy frames, posky quality AI models yourself?

[Guest Edam]

You have another option, "x1yyz2112"...make your own.Looking forward to those.

[Guest]

No need for sarcasm.The point is, that when you call yourself an AI "modeler", you ought to model AI planes instead of model UI planes and slap on an "AI" label.I call myself an AFCAD designer and a flighplan designer. If someone found that I was taking shortcuts on those, than I would expect the same treatment. Luckily, there are some modelers out there who take pride in their work.FSPainter is actually a really good modeler. Unfortunately, he usually only makes them with 1 LOD, so they are better for UI than AI. I use his stuff for UI and a sprinkling of AI, and I hold his technique in high regard. If he used LOD modeling, they would be great AI planes. As such, they are great UI planes right now.AI modeling is different from UI modeling. I don't mean to disrespect you, but you need to do your homework if you are going to comment about this stuff.You can't express much of an opinion when you don't know the subject.Nonetheless. Have a wonderful day!Thanks for your input.

[Guest]

Actually, I have found "something else out there".I was just wondering if someone knew of more.Why? Because I'm not the one calling myself an "AI modeler". No one person can do everything, that is why we are all here trying to help each other out and why some of us insist on doing things the "right" way and not just the "easy" way.Thanks again for expressing your opinion. Even though I don't agree with your it, I respect it.

[1mikel151 71]

And where might we find this "aircraft container manager" so we can try to understand your way of thinking. Searched the site with those keywords, NADAMichael http://www.geocities.com/res052cd/cmhbanner.gif

[Guest Edam]

>AI modeling is different from UI modeling. I don't mean to >disrespect you, but you need to do your homework if you are >going to comment about this stuff. >>You can't express much of an opinion when you don't know the >subject. How about this for an opinion? And this is the bottom line...if they work without a problem, or without a framerate hit for me, then they are ok. I'll let others, who have "done their homework," comment further.BTW, I will still be waiting for *your* models which will obviously be so much better.