58 minutes ago, micstatic said:

yeah that 2nd picture might show what we are seeing.  It has a flattened aspect to it in this view. 

We're happy to take a closer look if needed.  Can you elaborate more?  My main response was to the folks saying the nose is too elongated.  It's definitely not that. I'll have to eventually post a side shot to illustrate this.  However if from a certain angle you think it looks off then we'll take a look.   Thanks. 

59 minutes ago, sherv_BBS said:

You need to understand camera perspective when looking at these pics. As we have said it multiple times in the past,  it's the fish eye effect on the camera that makes the nose look elongated.  Asobo needs to fix the camera.

I've shouted this from the rooftops since MS2020 release.  The default zoom level on the drone camera is 50%.  99% of simmers never adjust this to the proper zoom, which after many hours of testing, I've found to be 79% (not 100 like you'd think as that level introduces to reverse fisheye effect)

Here is the default drone at 50%...Fisheye gone wild!  The wing close to the camera is too looooong while the far wing is too short in this "perspective"  Just flat-out looks wrong.

 

Now...zoom in to 79%.  After I zoomed to 79%, I panned the camera back to this position because the view was now too close to the aircraft.  The proportions of this little 737-700 look just about perfect don't they?  Remember...I zoomed in, then MOVED the Camera to achieve the view I wanted.

Now with the camera lens zoomed to 79%, and never touching the zoom ring on my camera again...I MOVE the camera to wherever I want it on the plane....so here is the nose of the 737 at 79% zoom and the physical camera placed where I want it.

That looks pretty good huh?  What folks tend to miss is the completely separate meanings of zoom and move (or pan) with camera manipulation.

Sherv is completely right that the proportions of any aircraft can look "off" if the cameraman is just grabbing the zoom ring on his camera lens and zooming...without moving himself (and the camera) to the proper distance from the subject.

I pride myself over the decades of being a screenshot artist 1st..then just getting into livery painting when I wanted a livery a freeware group painter refused to paint back in 2003.  He finally told me to just to paint the dang thing myself.  I taught myself how to, and that's how I got to where I am today. 🙂

I'll leave this long diatribe of camera settings with an actual screenshot that, properly zoomed and positioned, just appeals to my senses when I view it. (lighting, time of day, lens flare on (in this case) other traffic in just the right positions....a lot of thought when into this shot believe it or not)

Notice the sun on the flap canoes on the right wing but not the left, the sun reflection just on the front of the belly...the brightness just enough to see the livery.  I did not post-process this, I just adjusted the sim to get this shot.  Not 100% unedited I guess, but you rarely get the exact conditions you're looking for, and when they occur, by the time you set up the camera, they are gone, LOL.  This shot was pretty much default...I just adjusted the time back 2 mins to get the sun where I wanted it to produce the reflection off the fuse and the subtle lighting I was going for.

 

 

10 minutes ago, sherv_BBS said:

We're happy to take a closer look if needed.  Can you elaborate more?  My main response was to the folks saying the nose is too elongated.  It's definitely not that. I'll have to eventually post a side shot to illustrate this.  However if from a certain angle you think it looks off then we'll take a look.   Thanks. 

perhaps it's just the fish eye thing.  I almost see flattening here instead of a more rounded look.  But it's very tough to say for sure.  I may be wrong.  PS: Thanks for the fantastic updates to the community.  I love what you are doing with this plane as well as the way you are engaging with the market.  

5 hours ago, UAL4life said:

Feature creep will be the death of this project.

Not in a scrum/agile standpoint. Waterfall, yes. But agile is based around the customer desires and it's accepted in agile that change request equals more time/money. It's an accepted cost to deliver what the customer wants. But, agile delivers in small manageable chunks such as cell phone updates. Kinda like the roadmap delivery that Asobo, FSS and others are following.

5 hours ago, UAL4life said:

Feature creep will be the death of this project.

Completely wrong. You have no clue what is going on behind the scenes..... but you are entitled to your opinion. 

1 hour ago, Steve Dra said:

I've shouted this from the rooftops since MS2020 release.  The default zoom level on the drone camera is 50%.  99% of simmers never adjust this to the proper zoom, which after many hours of testing, I've found to be 79% (not 100 like you'd think as that level introduces to reverse fisheye effect)

Here is the default drone at 50%...Fisheye gone wild!  The wing close to the camera is too looooong while the far wing is too short in this "perspective"  Just flat-out looks wrong.

 

Now...zoom in to 79%.  After I zoomed to 79%, I panned the camera back to this position because the view was now too close to the aircraft.  The proportions of this little 737-700 look just about perfect don't they?  Remember...I zoomed in, then MOVED the Camera to achieve the view I wanted.

Now with the camera lens zoomed to 79%, and never touching the zoom ring on my camera again...I MOVE the camera to wherever I want it on the plane....so here is the nose of the 737 at 79% zoom and the physical camera placed where I want it.

That looks pretty good huh?  What folks tend to miss is the completely separate meanings of zoom and move (or pan) with camera manipulation.

Sherv is completely right that the proportions of any aircraft can look "off" if the cameraman is just grabbing the zoom ring on his camera lens and zooming...without moving himself (and the camera) to the proper distance from the subject.

I pride myself over the decades of being a screenshot artist 1st..then just getting into livery painting when I wanted a livery a freeware group painter refused to paint back in 2003.  He finally told me to just to paint the dang thing myself.  I taught myself how to, and that's how I got to where I am today. 🙂

I'll leave this long diatribe of camera settings with an actual screenshot that, properly zoomed and positioned, just appeals to my senses when I view it. (lighting, time of day, lens flare on (in this case) other traffic in just the right positions....a lot of thought when into this shot believe it or not)

Notice the sun on the flap canoes on the right wing but not the left, the sun reflection just on the front of the belly...the brightness just enough to see the livery.  I did not post-process this, I just adjusted the sim to get this shot.  Not 100% unedited I guess, but you rarely get the exact conditions you're looking for, and when they occur, by the time you set up the camera, they are gone, LOL.  This shot was pretty much default...I just adjusted the time back 2 mins to get the sun where I wanted it to produce the reflection off the fuse and the subtle lighting I was going for.

 

 

Hey Steve.  Thanks for the insight here. It does a look a lot better!  I will try out those settings for sure.  

This looks awesome. Great video with no lipstick, just straight up transparency and big effort going into accuracy.  Love the commitment to high fidelity here. Can't wait to fly this bird. 

I too am really looking forward to this aircraft development and release. So far, I like what I have been seeing 🙂 

I'm glad they've decided to expand it to a more "study level" aircraft. The community has been crying out for a high fidelity 757/767 for some time now. Unless your an X-plane user of course.  

Looks great.  I don't fly airliners hardly at all but Boeing made such a beautiful aircraft when they designed the B757 series... and my best friend flies one...  I'll be buying day 1!

 

14 minutes ago, james42 said:

I'm glad they've decided to expand it to a more "study level" aircraft. The community has been crying out for a high fidelity 757/767 for some time now. Unless your an X-plane user of course.  

Me too, I think the direction they have decided to take it is definitely the right one.   Regarding the exterior, the nose looked a bit flat and blunt rather than elongated, and the cabin windows look a bit off to me.

12 hours ago, sherv_BBS said:

We're happy to take a closer look if needed.  Can you elaborate more?  My main response was to the folks saying the nose is too elongated.  It's definitely not that. I'll have to eventually post a side shot to illustrate this.  However if from a certain angle you think it looks off then we'll take a look.   Thanks. 

You should change your account to commercial member, so that we know you are a developer - in this case, Bluebird Simulations, right? Unless you have to pay money to be a commercial member on Avsim, then I understand why you wouldn’t want to change your account.

Anyways, thanks for participating in this thread, it’s always great for the developer to mix and mingle with the prospective customer to improve their product.

Edited January 27, 20242 yr by abrams_tank

Sorry, OT, but is there a way/tool to save your default zoom to 79%?

After watching the video the first thing I can say is that I’m very pleased we’ll have a high fidelity 757 for the first time since I dare say…Fly!2 (for us old, old timers). If I could offer some critique, it would be on those CRT screens. I’m sure they’re not finished with the VC art yet, but one thing that jumped out at me was that they don’t look “shiny” at all. They actually look more like curved LCD screens. Those old CRT’s are super reflective and bounced light all over the place. In this (albeit early preview) video, they looked like they wrapped an LCD texture over a curved surface. Either way, this will be a day one purchase for me. Looking forward to it!

Edited January 27, 20242 yr by Bdub22

Hopefully you will publish a list for the lvars etc when the plane releases so we can bind hardware to commands externally?