Even before the Milviz response, you could see differences in the length of the models.

Please note that though some shapes might be essentially the same, the wires and vertices will surely be in different locations.  That’s how you can tell. 

48 minutes ago, Milviz said:

I’m on vacation

Please go to the pool bar, have a drink and don't be monitoring this thread,

Enjoy your vacation, you've posted your defence and shouldn't need to do anything more.

I will suggest that if you want to keep this thread open then you respectfully comment else you may receive a warning and the thread will be locked.

Thank you for playing nice.

 

Shocking way to approach a problem with another developer on a public forum, very bad error in judgement,milviz have always been professional and transparent i doubt very much they did this

Edited June 11, 20187 yr by suchw

I’ve asked that Avsim reopen this thread so that the endgame can be fully played out.  (Thanks mods)

I would like to make clear that we only got one email from them and that asked for our thoughts on this   We gave them our thoughts as a categorical denial.

We have never done any topology copying as we prefer to do our own modeling as much as possible.  And, they didn’t mention that the cost of making a topology copy would, essentially, be the same as that of making a new one. Plus that usually introduces new errors.

Finally, when we do use other devs models, we ask and pay for that usage as is evidenced by our deal with Soul for their Beaver.  Fully paid. As this type of thing has happened to us, we are well aware of how this can make one feel.

A final image of what’s different on ours:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/7n8j0dbmpt5vhv3/016.png?dl=0

Colin

If two modelers separately build a 3-D emulation of the same real-world object, it stands to reason that the end result will look essentially identical. It’s “proof” that both companies employ highly-skilled graphic artists, but not proof of plagiarism IMO.

Once upon a time , an elementary school teacher asked her students to write a text about their pets. After reviewing the submitted texts she says to one of her students. 

 

"Hey Johnnie, your text about your dog is exactly the same as your sister's  text ! Do you have a good explanation for this ?"

And Johnnie said :

"Of course it is! It's about the same dog ! " 

 

 

Edited June 12, 20187 yr by PMSoares

1 hour ago, Milviz said:

I’ve asked that Avsim reopen this thread so that the endgame can be fully played out.  (Thanks mods)

I would like to make clear that we only got one email from them and that asked for our thoughts on this   We gave them our thoughts as a categorical denial.

We have never done any topology copying as we prefer to do our own modeling as much as possible.  And, they didn’t mention that the cost of making a topology copy would, essentially, be the same as that of making a new one. Plus that usually introduces new errors.

Finally, when we do use other devs models, we ask and pay for that usage as is evidenced by our deal with Soul for their Beaver.  Fully paid. As this type of thing has happened to us, we are well aware of how this can make one feel.

A final image of what’s different on ours:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/7n8j0dbmpt5vhv3/016.png?dl=0

Colin

I'm not saying it is a copy but this is quite clearly edited model to what they are comparing to with the notch being smoothed out since judging by the shading.

Uh... of course the models edited.  We’re in a constant battle to make sure it’s right and those images (which we never got) are from a long time ago   We were and are, still working on the shape of things.

As well, smoothing is not always smooth when seen without maps.  

Its suggested to look at the wire frames and, if they ever post theirs, the difference should be obvious   

Moving on. 

Edited June 12, 20187 yr by Milviz

2 minutes ago, Milviz said:

Uh... of course the models edited.  We’re in a constant battle to make sure it’s right and those images (which we never got) are from a long time ago   We were and are, still working on the shape of things.

As well, smoothing is not always smooth when seen without maps.  

Moving on. 

Presenting it as evidence is rather dishonest then.

Alfredo Torrado & Juan Alcón have presented their case. Colin has responded openly (and showing surprising restraint!) with a proposal and images which should allow this issue to be settled. We're now waiting to hear for a response.

I respectfully request that any armchair analysts to restrain their opinions one way or the other until we hear from the OP.

Most here do not want to be forced in any capacity to be a jury in this matter. I did not and I do not want to look at "evidence", but can not undo seeing what I have seen presented here.

As a civilian and non militant there is only one thing that makes me snap to attention and look hard at the claims: The stairs, the complex rear stairs that look identical to me, both rendered incorrectly in exactly the same way. 

Have no horse in this race, but looking to protect AVSIM's members fairness and equal-handedness in as many things as possible, even unwelcome involvement in a matter like this. Why are the stairs the same?

If this question is entirely unwelcome, then please ignore it and leave it unanswered. However I would appreciate a rational end of the matter.

With kind regards hoping for both shared understanding and fairness, without either one seeming to be at the expense of the other. 

Stephen 

 

Edited June 12, 20187 yr by SpiritFlyer

After having a private conversation with Milviz and realizing that we made a mistake in not sending them the document we have presented in this forum (it was a technical mistake) we have decided to apologize for making this case public. As a result of that conversation we also want to make clear that Milviz model is not ours.

33 minutes ago, jadog said:

As a result of that conversation we also want to make clear that Milviz model is not ours.

That should stand as the final post in this thread.