Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

maxter

VC texturing?

Recommended Posts

I am wondering why is it that many/most a/c VC's (both freeware and payware ) are not well textured textured, when compared to the external textures. Modellers go to great efforts to make sure that every external rivet is accurately shown - but the VCs are nearly always far inferior. Not so much a criticism or complaint - but really wondering why? Is there some kind of technical limitation - or are the modellers simply worn out by the time they get to the VC?Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Actually it probably has more to do with work load than framerates. There are many more parts to texture in the VC than in the exterior and since you are closer to the part in the VC, then texturing has to be more precise/detailed to be believable (which is my biggest pet peeve).Regards, MichaelKDFW

Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe nForce4 SLI-x16 / AMD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the FSX exporter tools allow for a much better 3-d vc for those willing to put in the effort. There are many different ways to create vc's, and I won't go into all of the details suffice to say that now the tools exist to create the smallest details and still have good performance. One of the big changes in FSX has to do with the fact that the number of polygons a model has does not affect the framerate performance like it used to. Now the big factor is texture usage in the model, and something known as 'draw calls'. Taking advantage of all of this takes a fair amount of time & effort to not only learn about, but then execute.So ultimately it's a question of what the modeler is satisfied with. I've seen some incredible work lately in various designer forums. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My pet peeve for years. We have external models that look completely real with every aspect modelled-but the cockpit where we spend the real time is sorely behind-including not only looks but instruments.Time to do something about this...GeofaMy blog:http://geofageofa.spaces.live.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The vc is a big thing for me. This is the clock from one of my current projects...The housing & knobs are 3-d, but the actual clock is done using the traditional vc gauge method. The artwork was created by modeling the dial in Gmax, then taking a screen capture and doing some minor editing in PaintShop Pro to get the final bitmap for the gauge. There are many variations in use these days, including actually modeling & animating all of the hands! This pic was taken at a zoom of x2...http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/192696.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the VC you have a bunch of miniature software programs running - aka the gauges. Glass cockpits especially - 5 CRT's and 3 CDU's and a bunch of AP logic in the MD-11's case, all the CPU cycles needed for those to work at a decent FPS have to come from somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AS the OP , I should have explained myself a little more clearly - I am generally quite satisfied with the gauges in VC's and the actual modelling of the VC - it is the texturing of the panel,seats, sides of doors, armrests, etc that are the things that I always think are lacking. Please excuse my ignorance, but surely it is "just" a matter of a higher res/larger texture image for (say) the seating.? For example, Orbx have put out a high res cockpit for the Carenado Mooney.Barry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All good answers above including Roberts example...I'll offer my own observation because it's one of the most frustrating aspects of VC work.Open a VC texture from your favorite aircraft in Imagetool and observe the crisp, clean, detailed, texture work.Now load the same aircraft in sim and observe the same textures.There you will find those beautiful textures are now pixelated, sometimes blurry, etc.That is the result of the way the sim displays textures in VCs.:-(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wishing to stray OT Geoff, but what has happened to the signature shot of the smiling happy Captain, at the helm of his beloved Baron!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When FSX first came out, I kind of had the impression that TrackIR took the modellers by surprise. The truth is not so, as FS9 supports TrackIR beautifully. Still, I think the modeller mindset was that the sim pilot will look straight forward all of the time.How else to explain the default Learjet cockpit? If you don't know what I am talking about, load it up and look behind the pilot's seat.In FS9, there were a lot of shortcuts modellers and texturers could use to shave off performance-hogging model parts. Again, if you have the chance to really look around in an FS9 cockpit with a TrackIR, you will see what I mean. The FS9 versus the FSX Piper Cub is as good example as any. In other sims like IL2, you can't ever look around with six degrees of freedom becasue the cockpit has gaping holes that you will see if you truck your view to the side.Now, I think sim pilots spend a lot more time and effort exploring FSX and sim cockpits in detail. We expect more, and I think modellers are still playing catch-up. There are some technical hurdles to overcome regarding draw calls and animated textures, as has been described. It seems like only very recently that an appreciable number of developers can make VC gauges that have smooth frame rates; last year, I can only think of maybe one or two. So there are improvements on the gauge front.I remember an issue with the RAZBAM Intruder that comes to mind. The wings fold on the A-6,and there's supposed to be a lever that controls it. However, when the modellers put in the lever, the frame rates took a drastic hit. So, they decided to get rid of the lever. Sometimes, that kind of unexpected behavior will result from modelling. Maybe it's a modelling issue, maybe its a glitch in FSX, likely it's a combination of things that just happened and cannot be easily explained. Jeff ShylukAssistant Managing EditorSenior Staff ReviewerAVSIM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard that to be true and seem to remember some screens somewhere.My outline will work on any model and if you have that one you can compare the actual vc texture bmps in Image Tool followed by in sim observations and the differences are remarkable. :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Ron>>Orbx seem to have done a good job with the Caranado Mooney>cockpit??>>BarryOne thing to consider is that on a small single like a Mooney, you've got more frame rate headroom than you would with a big airliner and its systems. So on the Mooney you can do more with the VC texture fidelity without digging into frame rate. Whereas if you tried that with say (pick your complex add-on airliner) it would stand a greater chance of negatively impacting performance.RhettFS box: E8500 (@ 3.80 ghz), AC Freezer 7 Pro, ASUS P5E3 Premium, BFG 8800GTX 756 (nVidia 169 WHQL), 4gb DDR3 1600 Patriot Cas7 7-7-7-20 (2T), PC Power 750, WD 150gb 10000rpm Raptor, Seagate 500gb, Silverstone TJ09 case, Vista Ultimate 64ASX Client: AMD 3700+ (@ 2.6 ghz), 7800GT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites