Jimbib

For those of you on more modern versions of Photoshop, it's very simple, in the image resize dialog box, under the "Resample Image" tab, choose "Bicubic Sharper." To be honest, the easiest way to find out, is to resize the same skin many different times, using all the available resampling methods. Then get all of the images and overlay them in your image editing software. Then simply start flicking on and off the different layers to determine by eye which method retains the most detail when resized.

The only trouble with re-sizing is that it's very easy to choose the incorrect bicubic settings in Photoshop, resulting in a large loss of detail when going down to a small resolution.

Nothing wrong with the pics Falcon, I think they look great too Just together they were more than the vertical resolution of my screen. It's all good mate.

Looks like some nice skins, are people taking pics with textures on high yeah? Oh yeah, Falcon, dude, easy on the sigs mate.

http://news.stv.tv/uk/32002-pilot-missing-...r-jets-collide/ Fingers crossed for the second pilot.

You UV mapping technique is good though mate, I think you got it sorted. Chat soon dude.

Cool, one thing I see on your maps that may help; on bitmaps 2 and 4, there is a lot of empty white space. You could try scaling up the UV co-ordinates in the Unwrap UVW modifier to fill up that white space. This would allow for greater amounts of detail to be painted on the meshes that are mapped there, in this case they look like the wings, elevators, tail and other sundry smaller parts. A handy rule of thumb is to try to minimise the amount of spare space left on UVW bitmaps. Looking good though mate, keep it going

Hey Ed, is the whole model mapped onto those UV bitmaps?

Cool stuff, I think that went over near my house many eons ago before my time also, albeit on the back of a 747. Some sort of a round trip to over-fly a near by American memorial. An eye to the sky can sometimes be quite rewarding.

An F-102 Deuce is being worked on. As are a few F-101's.

Interesting, Marine One has gone over my house too, and yes I live in the UK It was accompanied by two Black Hawks and another H-3.

Nice work Ed

Hey Kreelin, in that vid, just as the wheels hit the floor at the landing, is that a small amount of wingtip vortex or a tire touch smoke effect?

At the end of the day, that's the bottom line.

Brand spanking new, check it out. http://www.creech.af.mil/

Dam nice skin it is too.

WIP

Really, what razgriz31m said is not rivet counting, there's no aggravating or harmful intent, the guy just made a statement concerning the scale of the intakes on the Foxhound. Perhaps it would have been better with a link to some reference material or orthgraphic projections for comparison, but all the same. All of us notice and do not notice different things respectively. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the intakes, but that's just my own opinion. If you want an example of real 'rivet counting', look here... http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=18191

The Sea Vixen alone in a full NF campaign would rock some serious socks.

Does Chuck Norris therefore have infinite mass?

Junction 102 on I-95. Mighty Eighth AF Museum.

Carnage of a wobbly goblin. Clicky

I don't think that was what he was asking. If the wings sweep on an aircraft at all, then most likely there is an animation slot added by the modeler in 3DS Max. The action of the wings sweeping in the Thirdwire series doesn't really make a difference to the flight model, as the series does not support different flight characteristics at variable geometry phases of the wings. See, if you take a look inside the data.ini of one of the aircraft, or any sweep wing aircraft for that matter, there should be an animation ID that is linked to a swing wing 'component.' For simplicity's sake, this component is usually set as a highlight device, allowing it to automatically sweep as velocity increases or decreases past a certain point. Take the third party MiG-27D mod for example, what you could probably do to make it a manual operation is change the current wing sweep data entries... [LeftSwingWing] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_MACH Setting[1].Angle=45.0 Setting[1].DeployValue=0.80 Setting[1].RetractValue=0.85 Setting[2].Angle=72.0 Setting[2].DeployValue=0.40 Setting[2].RetractValue=0.45 MaxDeflection=72.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.2 AnimationID=1 CLiftdc=0.0710 CDdc=0.0200 [RightSwingWing] SystemType=HIGHLIFT_DEVICE DeploymentMethod=AUTOMATIC_MACH Setting[1].Angle=45.0 Setting[1].DeployValue=0.80 Setting[1].RetractValue=0.85 Setting[2].Angle=72.0 Setting[2].DeployValue=0.40 Setting[2].RetractValue=0.45 MaxDeflection=72.0 MinDeflection=0.0 ControlRate=0.2 AnimationID=1 CLiftdc=0.0710 CDdc=0.0200 To something like [LeftSwingWing] SystemType=ANIMATION InputName=ANIMATION_1 DeploymentMethod=MANUAL AnimationTime=6.0 AnimationID=1 CLiftdc=0.0710 CDdc=0.0200 [RightSwingWing] SystemType=ANIMATION InputName=ANIMATION_1 DeploymentMethod=MANUAL AnimationTime=6.0 AnimationID=1 CLiftdc=0.0710 CDdc=0.0200 Only problem with this is you would not get the intermediate wing sweep angles of 45° and 72°, however, you can see that manual wing sweep is possible.

If anyone makes a Bloodhound, let me know, I have a couple of decent walkarounds and can get further pics easily.

It's a bit surprising that they're tearing them up this easily, I thought previously that a big issue had been made about the materials in the paint they are covered in. I had heard they were just going to be stored in the hangars at Tonopah with their wings taken off.