I don't want to derail this but bluray is 24HZ and should be left at that setting, If you set your TV to 50 or 100HZ you will get judder.Just a FYI :(

You are right, I stand corrected, normally movie broadcast or DVD in the UK is at 25 fps, true Bluray display using HDMI 1.3 and an appropriate HDTV should show 24p, so 24 frames per second to be accurate what you see in the cinema. However, I can still switch on the Motionflow 100Hz on my sony and it will still double the frames, it does not judder but it does look like the movie was captures on a hand camera, in other words, very odd. Now the beauty of the Motionflow 100Hz is that is work pretty much on any signal coming into the TV especially via HDMI, so my Xbox360 and PC signals can be doubles using this Motionflow, which makes watching any game or indeed FSX look a lot smoother :( Here's the techie specs:MotionFlow + 100HZ: Conventional LCD televisions show 50 pictures (frames) per second (50Hz). Sony

At one level, it looks like we have some artistic temperments flaring, and that's fine. That's what they're supposed to do. An artist that did not feel passionate about his craft would not be much of an artist. So I tend to keep these things in perspective and not get wrapped around the axle with a bit of McPhatitude or whatever else is on display beyond simple comments on preferences. Arguments among painters are probably best kept among painters, but when they spill out into ths street, the bystanders should realize what's going on and simply smile. McPhat does amazing paint jobs, and the AAL paint proves this (and the person who posted them sure makes a pretty screen shot). There are enough developers who agree that their services are in commercial demand as value added to their products. McPhat has a recognizable style, and that involves some grit. Everybody knows this, and if you don't appreciate it, there's absolutely nothing wrong about it. As a commercial operation, if it appears to be cutting into their bottom line, I'm sure McPhat will reconsider. But if most people like a certain artistic exaggeration for effect, then it makes sense to give it to them. At the end of the day, McPhat probably isn't getting filthy rich off of their filthy paints, so I say let them do what they enjoy doing and either install it or not.If an eagle was backwards, I'm sure their QC person feels bad that he didn't catch it. They take this stuff seriously enough to have someone who only checks their work against the real thing.My own experience is with painting miniatures, which I have done at the regional competition level, and enjoyed as an observer at international competitions held at GENCON and the like. Among the top painters, you could pick their work out of a lineup, because everyone has his or her own style. Personally, I tended toward an unrealistic clean look because I liked my stuff to be "pretty." Sometimes, though, I'd do some layered washes and inks and get some pretty nasty-looking paintjobs. It depended on what tone I was wanting to set for the piece. I don't want to speak for McPhat, but it isn't as if these guys don't know what airplanes look like. They are making an artistic decision to set a tone, perhaps through exaggeration of certain elements. A lot is missing from a flight sim representation of an airplane in regular service, cues that would let us know what a hard-worker that American Airline MD-80 really is. A smell, a stain, a million things. McPhat translates all that into something we CAN appreciate on screen. If it doesn't look exactly like a photograph, or any photograph, or anything you've ever seen, that's okay. We're talking about a particular artistic interpretation that is emphasizing an aspect of flight reality.He's Dutch. I never saw a night sky like Vincent Van Gogh painted, either ;-)Maybe another artist would want to emphasize the wonder of flight, or the cold but undeniable charms of the engineer's art, or just get as close to replicating what he actually saw during his last trip to the airport. Then a decision might be made that dirt and wear got in the way of the artistic vision. Great! I would probably like those paints, too. It would give me a little different flavor. Let's leave our tastes at that and not turn this into yet another silly argument. There are good points to be made on both sides of the dirt issue, and beyond that it is what people prefer to look at when they're playing with their toy airplanes.

Couldn't agree more. As you say, painting is about interpretation, otherwise one would simply stretch a photograph into a texture and use that. And the physical scale modeling point is well made too. Some scale modelers paint things with accurate swatches of the colours on the real things, others go for a scale look and drop a lot of blue into their tones whilst lightening them down so they look like they are at the distance you perceive for a scale model.Both approaches are equally valid, just as going for a feeling on a flight sim repaint is a matter of choosing how you want to go. McPhat's approach is not my personal cup of tea for airliners, but then again I bet lots of people think my repaints suck, and they are perfectly entitled to do so, since half the time they are probably right LOLIf you want a real heated discussion about paint, go to a scale modeling fair and ask someone what colour an SE5a was in WW1.Al

I also just noticed that the eagle in the tail logo is backwards - it's just simple things like these that prevent you guys from becoming so much better:

What bugs me is that they've never noticed how terribly incorrect their previously released Iberia paints are,.. the entire right-side tail logo is incorrect on the ones they already released (Super 80 Classic & Super80 Pro) and it is currently incorrect on the previews of the UHDT version they are working on... but yet they have a "quality control expert" on their staff? :(

Don't get me started LOL. We don't even know what color Roman shields were during the Punic Wars, and yet God forbid you show up with... well, anything, really, because there will be someone who will argue. Painting is weird. "You put a drop of green in red to darken it? I just use black!" (Which is why your paint jobs suck...) The most obsessive are the Nappy fans, with all those turned cuffs and stripes and the like. Then what looks right from when you are standing next to the wargame table, looks wrong when you pick the thing up to ogle it, and vice-versa. Sometimes I wish there was a way to paint 25 mm figures with a four-foot long 000 brush!What I hope doesn't get lost in all this is that specularity and bump maps have a lot to offer and McPhat isn't the only ones doing excellent work with it (OZx's Grumman Goose HD Redux is available as a free download, very nice). They do seem to be producing the most pixels per meter at the moment, and more detail without a frame rate hit can't be a bad thing. When you consider they are doing this while also meeting deadlines on very large commerical projects, I think you can put some of the comments here in the proper perspective.I noticed the faded American Airlines too. I would probably prefer to fly with a carrier that was not obviously cutting corners on paint LOL. On the other hand, like I said, it sets a tone, and for all I know they tried a brighter, bolder paint and it looked out of place with the rest of the model.The screen shots are amazing. I wish I could have taken them!

Well, that's one of the fun things about painting Roman stuff, you've got Trajan's Column and about two intact genuine Roman shields that have ever been discovered, and after that you can do what you like LOLAl

Great topic . Im not a fan of the dirty textures and not a fan of McPhat but it is a fantastic repaint . Lee Marrow

What bugs me is that they've never noticed how terribly incorrect their previously released Iberia paints are,.. the entire right-side tail logo is incorrect on the ones they already released (Super 80 Classic & Super80 Pro) and it is currently incorrect on the previews of the UHDT version they are working on... but yet they have a "quality control expert" on their staff? :(

What I don't understand Alex is the following : You used to be a member on our forum, a pretty darn satisfied and happy one member, if I recall it : http://www.mcphatstudios.net/index.php?opt...&id=453#480Then, at some point, you pointed out something you thought we did wrong, to which we replied that we had to work with what was presented to us by feelThere and that we had to choose for what we thought was the least bad solution. You replied that you could fix it. We asked you to show it to us, you never replied and never came back : http://www.mcphatstudios.net/index.php?opt...&id=893#919Three people, spend 2 hours researching your 'suggestion', which was based on an assumption. All we asked was if you -in the future- could check first to be sure, before mentioning it to us.We kinda cornered you there. Our so called 'Quality Control Expert' was one of those persons. Is that why you hold a grudge and rant on other forums about how 'terribly incorrect' our textures are? Cause, like I said, you used to be pretty excited about our work...Look, it's been over a year now. You were wrong about the night lighting, we were right. You tried to make us look bad, by saying you could fix it. We dared you to show it to us, which you didn't. I believe we had a laugh or two, after we had a feeling you would never show us wrong, simply cause you couldn't.What did we win, eventually? Nothing, cause a year later, you still hold a grudge and make fun of that exact same person that kinda made fun of you back then, trying to catch him on every little mistake you can find. So, we made you look like an *ss, now you make us look like an *ss. How about we kiss and make up? :( To go ontopic again : There are many repainters and texture artists out there. 99% of them make clean, glossy textures, which is perfectly okay. We like ours dirty, and so do the thousands of users who download and buy our textures and visit our website. The difference is though : You do not see us give 'well meant advice' to glossy painters how they should dirty up their planes. EVER. It's not up to us to tell another artist how to interpret his or her art. You want to paint glossy, go ahead. You want to paint clean? Go ahead. There's thousands of people who like glossy planes!This topic is not about dirty or clean textures though. It's about HD textures, the first on a tube, and the most detailed (px/m ratio, measured from the fuselage) ever, without losing framesm without oversharpened textures. Something many professionals and want to be professionals did not think was possible. With matching specular, bump and alpha channels on all maps, FOR US it is a milestone, as it is something we have never done before, and is not done before by anybody else yet either.Look, I may be an Audi fan, and I may think that Mercedes makes ugly cars. But if my neigbour comes home with a flying Mercedes that runs on hydrogen, I will not say : Your Mercedes is ugly. No, I'll applaud him for having a flying mercedes that runs on hydrogen.

The only thing that counts in the end is the quality of the paintwork ,in other words, the actual result.Its clear to everyone , this probably is the best paintwork ever.It is hard , to be frank impossible ,to deny that without making a fool of yourselves.If you like ,go ahead and give the rest of the world a laugh.Leen

Like I said guys : Focus on the things you like, not on the things you don't like!

:(

What did we win, eventually? Nothing, cause a year later, you still hold a grudge and make fun of that exact same person that kinda made fun of you back then, trying to catch him on every little mistake you

Whatever you say... It doesn't change the fact that your paints are incorrect.. and unfinished.

Looks great !!! Make sure to filth-up the aft air stair door and the mlg wheel assy's.

Make sure to filth-up the aft air stair door and the mlg wheel assy's.

Sorry, they're too full of themselves to listen or take suggestions.

We like ours dirty, and so do the thousands of users who download and buy our textures and visit our website.

Good for you, the thousands of people that download my 100%-free liveries from this very website's file library like mine and even more so that I listen and improve my paints based on what they have to say (logical suggestions only, obviously).I think you guys are honestly just lazy and don't see a need to make anything accurate. (Hey it's dirty, about 50% of the people will love that and not care, and the other 50% well, we'll just ignore and ban from our forums for bringing up any suggestions). I still haven't received any response in your novel-like replies about my very simple fix/suggestions to the AA paint. Oh wait, now I remember who I'm dealing with...

"I think you guys are honestly just lazy" :( I can understand that some people do not like Mcphats dirty look, I too am not a fan of the "clapped out look"In fact i doubt that anyone would board an aircraft in that visual condition , but to call it lazy painting is cazy!!!!!Many hours of work have gone into that repaint and although as i say it is not for me , I still remain impressed by the end result .surely if you call yourself a repainter you can see the work involved ?

Well, whether you folks like the livery paint or not, I do hope some of you at least enjoyed the screenshots I took, after all, thats why I posted it, to share them with the FS community. I took these shots in the very early hours of the morning, shortly after DL the livery, I should have been sleeping but I just had to try out this long awaited 1st UHDT paint job. I personally very much enjoy and admire the livery paint as a whole (texture, specular, bump mapping etc), This beauty kept me up till @5am in the morning, I cannot remember last time doing that (I do remember spending nearly an entire day on FSX after REX was released but thankfully that was during the day).Anyways, I put in a considerable effort and several hours making & posting these screenshots for others to see, so if you can either enjoy or at the very least respect the maker of these screenshots, perhaps one could approach the makers of the livery with the same attitude or any other artist/programmer/contributer to the FS community, whether you like their product or not, it is still breathing more life into FSX.My 2cs,Cheers