Anyone know how I can view an aircraft without FS or FSRepaint, ie, when im doing a repaint i can just load it up and see where i stand?Thanks in advance :)

Are you aware of the fact you can use FSrepaint WITHOUT having FS9 installed?Program FilesMicrosoft GamesFlight Simulator 9aircraft is the path you need.Just create these folders , the aircraft folder only has to contain your model and repaint.RegardsLeen de Jager

I use FSRepaint to get a view of the repaint in progress. I find it especially useful for getting textures lined up side-to-side or if the fuselage texture is more than one width/length of the texture long - such as Bob May's fuselage for the latest rev of PAD's Twin Otter. Lining up stripes and such is a bit tricky.I have heard that there is an emasculated version of FSR that is free and is suitable for viewing a model and textures only. I wish I had heard about it before I bought FSR. I only use FSR for looking at the model and texture and not for editing texture files.One area that FSR falls down is reflective textures. To see the result of Alpha Channel changes you have to load flight sim.Bill

I bought FSRepaint and get my money's worth simply using it as an aircraft texture viewer. DXTbmp has a thumbnail viewer which is pretty handy for looking at any file-format; thanks to Martin Wright, it's FREE.

>I bought FSRepaint and get my money's worth simply>using it as an aircraft texture viewer. DXTbmp has a thumbnail>viewer which is pretty handy for looking at any file-format;>thanks to Martin Wright, it's FREE. I guess you're right about getting your money's worth with FSR. I too love DXTBmp. BTW, a couple of years ago I suggested a slight change to Martin. The buttons in the lower left hand were - to my way of thinking - out of order. I suggested the current order as being more intuitive. IIRC he had them grouped along the lines of load, save, send to editor, refresh from editor. I suggested he change the order of those buttons to loade, send, refresh, save which is the order you would do things naturally. Martin graciously agreed to do it. Perhaps my little suggestion made a great product a bit better.What do you think?

One area that FSR falls down is reflective textures. To see the result of Alpha Channel changes you have to load flight sim.The line above is`nt telling the real fact.Alpha layers can be changed and viewed within FSR.Leen de Jagerps:Strange , the one who started this topic is`nt responding on the answers he gets.

Leen de Jager wrote:The line above is`nt telling the real fact.Alpha layers can be changed and viewed within FSR.But FSR doesn't show the resulting reflectivity changes that result from the alpha channel changes. FSD doesn't show the textures as reflective. To see if the alpha channel is dark enough or properly aligned (in the case of paint detail on an otherwise shiny metal surface) you have to load Flight Simulator. So my original statement stands.I did a livery for the Lear 60 that had the engine nacelles chiny metal but with the registration number on the nacelle. Obviously I needed a dark alpha channel to generate a shiny metallic look. Equally obviously I had to have almost white where the reg number went so it was non-reflective. Getting the number part of texture lined up properly between the main texture and the alpha channel would have gone faster if I could have checked the alignment in FSD.

Bill wrote: To see the result of Alpha Channel changes you have to load flight sim.Sorry Bill ,I think there is a little misunderstanding.FSR does show the textures as reflective.To see the effect of the changes to an alpha layer it is not needed to load the Flightsimulator.Simply reloading the textures in FSR shows the changes of the alpla on the model in case of changeing the alphas outside FSR.BUT alphas can be changed and its result can bee seen IN FSR.On the other hand , aligning the alpha and the texture is something very simple.There is no need to use FSR for this.Just use the RGB texture as a mask (as a temp. guiding layer) on your alpha.So going back to the start of the discussion.Changes to the alpha made in FSR show directly on the model ,loading the model in FS to see the changes is not needed.I made a light-grey rectangle on the alpha from the F28 US-Air livery I made for Project Fokker Jetline.As you can see the model is surely showing ( in FSR) the behaveour of the alpha.I am afraid you bought the program but never really explored its features.Personally I never bought FSR and I use the free demo only.BUT , I know how it works.Best regardsLeen de Jagerhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/178488.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/178489.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/178490.jpghttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/178491.jpg

>One area that FSR falls down is reflective textures. To see>the result of Alpha Channel changes you have to load flight>sim.>>>The line above is`nt telling the real fact.>>Alpha layers can be changed and viewed within FSR.>>Leen de Jager>I bought FSR and use it with great pleasure for all my repaints, FSR + Corel PP, that is.It is especially helpful for aligning and placing textures to the exact spot.However, I DO see some shortcomings in the way FSR treats the alpha channel and its resulting reflections: Simply because FSR seems to neglect envmap.bmp which is part of FS9 and a great responsible for the appearance of your reflections. In other words, in order to get a real idea about the resulting reflections, it is always necessary to open FS.Pipe

Oh yes no doubt about that.Bill ,however, was stating FSR does not show changes and alignment.That was the point I disagreed.FSR does show reflective parts.In other words FSR shows wich parts are reflective and the amount of their reflection.The reflection ( better said , what we see reflected) in Flightsimulator is depending on the envmap file.The amount of reflection is controlled by the aplha-layer only.In fact this envmap file is misleading us , it is ment to show us an impression of the world mirrored on the plane.All sorts of colors are present in the envmap file.Sometimes this makes the reflection on the plane very strange and unrealistic.Just try this.Make a screenshot flying a bare metal plane over the north pole.What do we see on the belly of the plane, yes ,green (trees)Thats why I made and use separate envmapfiles for making screenshots.http://www.dutchfs.com/crew/leen/envmapset.jpg Desert ........................................................... polar situation ........................................ meadows/forestYou may try these samples.just copy ,remove the text and save as DXT.I have seen a special envmap file made by Tom Knudsen.In fact he used a mountain-view-photo for his file.The envmap file however has to be built from (almost) horizontal lines only to avoid the reflection having a very unrealistic caleidoscopic effect.It is clear, none of the examples above , nor the original envmap.bmp,is suitable for high altitude screeshots, flying over the clouds.You can imagine how that envmap file , we need here, should look like.RegardsLeen de Jager

Very interesting considerations, Leen.I

You are right about that Pipe.The ideal envmap does not exist.In FSX we also have one single envmap-file.I had no time to do some experiments conceirning this issue in FSX yet.Today I downloaded one of your repaints I like it very well.With this repaint you also provided a custom-made envmap made by Pedro Padilla.I could not resit the temptation of making a screenshot using this envmap.For these screenshots I used my bare-metal F28 US-Air.Screenshots were made flying at high altitude .Under the plane just clouds and the stratos above.As you can see Pedro Padilla`s file is`nt suitable for this situation.For the second screenshot I used my high-altitude-overcast-envmap.I visited many screenshot-forums and I wonder why so few people realise it is vital to have special custom-made envmaps depending on the screenshot we want to make.Both screens were made using slew, thats why the wheels are out.(at 24.000 ft.):-hmmm Best regardsLeen de Jagerhttp://www.dutchfs.com/crew/leen/tijdelijk/ha2.jpghttp://www.dutchfs.com/crew/leen/tijdelijk/ha1.jpg

Sure, Leen, every envmap has to be a trade-off. And you

Hi Pipe,I do not think you have to apologize.The initial poster of the question received an answer to his question on this topic (given by me) but never reacted on the answer.As you can see he posted this topic but never posted on this topic again.I suppose he has already seen his question being answered but did`nt bother to say thanks to anyone.So he`s the one to apologize himself not you.I am going to download your Air Koryo Tu-134 and study the alphas.I`ll be back,Leen

Here I am back again.I did some tests with your file.It seems very odd , but I used the F28 again , this time with your fuse bmp.Did not succeed in finding the original plane AND it`s easier for me to draw conclusions using a plane I am extreme familiar with.Your alpha with the cloud-like structure gives a certain effect,making the gloss not completely equal shiny, wich looks very good.*As you stated yourself already, we have three factors influencing the appearance.The gloss made by de mdl file ( we can do nothing there)The alpha layer.The envmap.The envmap just makes the illusion of flying in the real world en has no influense at all at the gloss and shine, so we can forget about that one.The problem is the gloss made by the mdl file.There is something terrible wrong with the gloss from the mdl file (ALL modelfiles in FS) because its only making gloss at the parts of the plane wich are enlightened by the sun.In real there is still gloss on the shade-side of airplanes due to the reflectig light from the surrounding world.MDL files cannot do that , they only make gloss at the sunny side.The alpha however makes gloss all over the plane no matter where the light comes from.Here we have the answer to our unsolvable problem.The mdl gloss is overruling the alpha.Have a look at the (weird) shots.Left top, in the shade with "reflections OFF" wich actually means "with alphas off"Right top the same but fully enlightened by direct sunlight.Left bottom, in the shade withe "reflections ON" wich actually means "with alphas on", we can see the nice structure you provided your alpha with, it looks great.Right bottom the same but fully enlightened by direct sunlight, the total gloss increases but all the detail from the alpha is gone.Conclusion:Making it perfect on both sides is impossible.Inspecting the quality of the alpha......look at the shaded side.*RegardsLeenhttp://www.dutchfs.com/crew/leen/tijdelijk/vv.jpg