Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.
The AVSIM Community

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

2D panel sideviews?

mgh
in MS FSX | FSX-SE Forum

Featured Replies

Great to hear from you Paul! :)As I see it people who have never tried to make a panel will not have a clue what I am talking about...thankyou for helping to clarify the situation. :)Hello Michael, be happy with your VC's because you do not know what I'm on about.Lets be clear I am not talking GA here!A 2D panel without a VFR (landing view/pilots point of view) is no panel at all to me. The main downside of a 2D main view only is that one cannot get a perspective that gives one that immersive feeling. To get the correct eye point for the VFR I use the FORWARD_UP view ...oh whats the point!...OK I'll join the club..I'll learn to make VC's ...but rest assured I will be charging! :-lolSo the side views are not the biggest issue for me ...but while we are on the subject .Hello Ralph , below is a pic of a well know A320 side view ....one is a VC view and one is a photoreal 2D side view.Well you make up your mind which you think is which and which one you like.:)http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v640/ede...00/fsscr165.jpg

48348495527_ff6da9c26f.jpg


My FS Videos

  • Replies 92
  • Views 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

  • Commercial Member

............and before someone asks why the texture in the 2d sideview can't be used in the VC.Well, there's a number of reasons. The person designing the 2d panel isn't likely to be also creating the GMAX VC, so there's a quality/creativity issue straight away. Just look at the 2 pic's in Eds post, both are supposed to be an Airbus, yet they are both different.....we can assume the photograph shows how it should be :-)The 2d sideview is a 1024 x 728 (usually) bitmap and can contain a wealth of detail whereas the texture applied to the VC is a much smaller resolution and therefore can't be as detailed.Yes there are exceptions and it'll be interesting see how much more detailed VC textures can become.I'm now wondering how long it'll take you to retexture that Airbus VC Ed ;-)Dreamfleet Project ManagerGreatest Airliners - DC-8Greatest Airliners - 727 Whisperjethttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

Cheers

 

Paul Golding

>I'm now wondering how long it'll take you to retexture that>Airbus VC Ed ;-)>Exactly! I rest my case! :)

48348495527_ff6da9c26f.jpg


My FS Videos

imo there is no need for 2D panels with developers like PMDG,RealAirSimulations,suprunovdesign at work.... flying their aircraft is like flying a Level-D sim!

>imo there is no need for 2D panels with developers like>PMDG,RealAirSimulations,suprunovdesign at work.... flying>their aircraft is like flying a Level-D sim! Yeah your are right. :-dohYou just don't get it do you?Do you do anything for this flightsimulator? ..or do you just get your wallet out?

48348495527_ff6da9c26f.jpg


My FS Videos

>Yeah your are right. :-doh>>You just don't get it do you?>>Do you do anything for this flightsimulator? ..or do you just>get your wallet out?Ed, A lot of people ARE making the transition from 2D only to 3D. The majority used to be 2D but I think it's starting to switch over... soon the 2D will be a thing of the past ( you can stay in denial all you want ). The biggest complaint of most 2D users about 3D ( besides textures looking not as good - which in Level-D / PMDG I have to disagree with you ) is the framerates and not being able to see all of your gauges in the window at once. The framerates will continue to improve. The new mouse-look feature in the demo is very nice. Those that didn't have TrackIR (which makes VC's 10000x better) already maybe didn't know what they were missing. Anyhow, I can appreciate all the work you've done ( and will continue to do ) but don't shoot people down for voicing their opinions on the matter. Agree to disagree but don't continue to belittle those who have a differing viewpoint. Take it easy and welcome to the 'new world'.

Obviously, as anyone can see from the comparison there, that the "photoreal" (such an odd term to me...it's clear that it IS a photo, so why not call it that? Photoreal suggests something artifical made to look as real as a photo, not a photo cut out and stuck on something. Maybe I'm just odd) texture looks better as a screenshot.However, does the side stick move on your side panel? Does the lighting change as you turn? Those are things that would kill it for me. They look great, but if they don't seem alive and have a sense of depth, it would certainly lose something for me. I'd much rather see a well done side VC view. Also, I like to have my view pan, instead of snap. It seems more realistic to me.

Mr A32x is welcome as is everyone else to their own opinion.FWIW I do own Track IR and I do fly VC's in GA.You VC lovers have everything you want and I am happy for you.I just wanted to fly my style in FSX.Personally I think the future for me is a home built cockpit. :-kewl

48348495527_ff6da9c26f.jpg


My FS Videos

>Mr A32x is welcome as is everyone else to their own opinion.>>FWIW I do own Track IR and I do fly VC's in GA.>>You VC lovers have everything you want and I am happy for>you.>>I just wanted to fly my style in FSX.>>Personally I think the future for me is a home built cockpit.>:-kewlHeh, Had to edit that last part in eh? :) It's all good bud! :) We all take what we want ( and some put back in, be it money or development { both are (or should be) for enjoyment though } ) from the sim!

>Personally I think the future for me is a home built cockpit.>:-kewlNow there's a point we can agree on. That is the ultimate in realism!

"but please don't mess with my cockpits!"LOL!Hang in there Ed. I can relate to all of your Picasso's suddenly being devalued overnight...LOL. One glorious day, when VC graphics finally get up to speed with your 2D panels (and your graphics card has 12 cooling fans on both sides of it...) we'll all laugh hard at this like a copy of FS1.The pressure is definitely on VC quality and performance to hone up now.

First I need an outer shell. :-hahhttp://myaviation.net/search/photo_search....1951&size=large

48348495527_ff6da9c26f.jpg


My FS Videos

  • Commercial Member

>Obviously, as anyone can see from the comparison there, that>the "photoreal" (such an odd term to me...it's clear that it>IS a photo, so why not call it that? Photoreal suggests>something artifical made to look as real as a photo, not a>photo cut out and stuck on something. Maybe I'm just odd)>texture looks better as a screenshot.It's photoreal because these images are almost never a cut out photo. I personally create a hand drawn layer using a mozaic of many photographs and then replace most of the hand drawn elements as required to acheive the result I want. Try sitting in your car and taking a photo of the passenger side and using it as a side view to see what I mean!>However, does the side stick move on your side panel? Does>the lighting change as you turn? Those are things that would>kill it for me. They look great, but if they don't seem alive>and have a sense of depth, it would certainly lose something>for me. I'd much rather see a well done side VC view. Also,>I like to have my view pan, instead of snap. It seems more>realistic to me.Certainly, better VC models, artwork and texture resolution is going to have to be the way forward, though this is going to be something of a knock for freeware individuals creating complex add-ons.Dreamfleet Project ManagerGreatest Airliners - DC-8Greatest Airliners - 727 Whisperjethttp://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpg

Cheers

 

Paul Golding

>>Obviously, as anyone can see from the comparison there,>that>>the "photoreal" (such an odd term to me...it's clear that it>>IS a photo, so why not call it that? Photoreal suggests>>something artifical made to look as real as a photo, not a>>photo cut out and stuck on something. Maybe I'm just odd)>>texture looks better as a screenshot.>>It's photoreal because these images are almost never a cut out>photo. I personally create a hand drawn layer using a mozaic>of many photographs and then replace most of the hand drawn>elements as required to acheive the result I want. Try>sitting in your car and taking a photo of the passenger side>and using it as a side view to see what I mean!>>>However, does the side stick move on your side panel? Does>>the lighting change as you turn? Those are things that>would>>kill it for me. They look great, but if they don't seem>alive>>and have a sense of depth, it would certainly lose something>>for me. I'd much rather see a well done side VC view. >Also,>>I like to have my view pan, instead of snap. It seems more>>realistic to me.>>Certainly, better VC models, artwork and texture resolution is>going to have to be the way forward, though this is going to>be something of a knock for freeware individuals creating>complex add-ons.>>Dreamfleet Project Manager>Greatest Airliners - DC-8>Greatest Airliners - 727 Whisperjet>>http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/gfx/images/F...BANNER_PAUL.jpgThanks, I appreciate the info on that. I figured the textures were just pulled from stock photography.

Create an account or sign in to comment
Go to topic listing

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications
Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.