PHANTOM PHOR EVER LODS :)
-
I know the thread is dead for long time now… Im too busy with real life projects and work and got stuck in the mud… When i will have time i will do again something in it… if somebody else can work on it from where i stoped i can give him the model to continue… i can give my 100% new one (its like 20%) ready and the edits i done to the last screenshot you can see here in ccc’s and Rangers model…
Janhas has made some kind of F-4. I have not checked. If it is good and all HPs are modeled - spearated AIM-9 stations - maybe it is not worth redoing this rather Janhas F-4 model should be tweaked and adapted.
-
This thread was a nice read . . . so how many the new F-4s have actually been integrated to DB’s?
I can give some back info for clarity. I believe the original F-4 LOD came by way of Thoarek. He developed the model, gave it to me as a parting gift, and I then adapted with both CCC’s and WaveyDaves help. The original model had quite a few issues - and I have long since lost my work list of issues that were systematically removed. I do recall the issue with the hardpoints, landing gear, and so forth. Many additional tweaks were done after the model was adopted into RV/FF DXMs. Once that occurred, I believe WaveyDave reset the entire model since the centerline was slightly off when he viewed the model in 3DS or whatever program he used to tweak it. Also, there are still considerable autoshade issues that existed with the LOD model and those were for the most part corrected using DXedit. Another point was I found quite a few parts of the wing were not flush with the main wing - specifically the slats, airbrakes, underside wheel covers - - in short the model was still kind of rough when it was adopted and I periodically went back and clean a few things up everytime I revisited the set. I couldn’t see a lot of that stuff in LOD editor because it was a bit clunky for model work where as DXedit was used on an Apple 30" monitor and I was able to see a lot of detail and fix things. Unfortunately, the very best version of all the Phantoms and all my other model work was in FF6. The list of fixes is simply too numerous to mention and I am unsure if those DXM models can be reversed back to 3ds and then back to LOD. If so, I have detailed files of all the DXMs from the four theater DBs in FF6; Korea, ITO2, Taiwan, Aegean, not to mention the Falklands which was never formally released but was rather far along.
I would also encourage the use of a single skin. I integrated nearly all ITO2 models with multiple skin sets using old code that used squadron numbers matched to the skin sets. For FF I think that worked pretty well but I am not sure about how BMS codes handles multiple skin sets now. That might be why there were some issues with Phantoms with more than one skin set. The easier thing to do is to swap out skin sets - manually if you want to enjoy different paint schemes. Also, to be honest, we found AI in FF6 still didn’t seem to handle the skin sets properly, so despite setting the skin sets, ATO would generate a/c at places that I didn’t expect - and seemed more random than predictable. I didn’t really bother to investigate that.
I also noticed one particular variant is still missing - the RF-4 . . . I think that is a model that I couldn’t locate an LOD for - I can’t recall now if CCC or WaveyDave or someone made me a nose piece and I somehow added it to the F4B or C or something like that using DXedit.
Another point to note is that I do have the PSD’s for the Phantom skins if anyone is interested in making new skins … that area really big files but - make skinning a snap.
I wasn’t clear if JanHaas has his own F4 Phantom model - if it is better by all means press forward and upgrade! However, a model set like the Phantoms represent quite a body of work and adopting a new model should be given careful thought because it involves a lot of time and effort and whatever is choosen for upgrade really needs to demonstrate a significant improvement to warrant the effort. The other thing to think about is how much resolution and refinement does one really require in Falcon - many models when viewed from more than a few hundred yards are not that easy to tell from much older primitive models. My approach was to first think of Falcon as using a primary model - it all began with the F-16. That is really where the strength and effort for the game is and should be. However, for folks like myself, I like the idea of having some other choices even if they are more primitive (which from an integration standpoint might prove easier) - The F-4 Phantom in the late 60’s and 70s, for the US, was much like the F-16 was for the 80’s to present. Depending on the theater, a primary model is the model that takes center stage for a campaign. For ITO2 - 6 Days War it was clearly the Mirage IIIC, for Falklands it was the Harrier for Britain and the Mirage for Argentina. So, picking a primary model to develop is no simple or easy task. But, if you dedicate a team effort towards doing that you can develop some pretty unique experiences for the flyers. In fact, that is a good approach for anyone considering theater work.
-
Nice work by Jan Has. Superior to the FF6 model. Definitely worthy contender to replace the older existing models in the current DB, especially, if the FF6 model hasn’t been integrated yet. That will be a lot of work either way though. Hopefully, Jan Has will include all the other variants and skins for free as well. Whereas nearly all the variants of Phantoms have already been done in FF6 and skinned - not sure how many sets I did, but it was a quite a few - plus the PSDs are available for those interested to make their own variations. It is a tough decision - go with a nice new model or something older with some flaws. Not my department. Which ever way theater and BMS Group decide - the users win!
-
Hey Tony, good to see you around again
Regarding the F-4, I wanted to integrate sometime ago into BMS DB, but since we had doubts about the origination of the models, it was decided to keep them off (Although you gave kinda global permission for them). Now that you say it this way, it makes more sense that you are the “legal” rights holder for this model (Since Thorak, the creator gave you full permissions). So technically we now have full rights and if it’ll be decided to integrate into BMS DB, it would be a technical decision only.
I guess there are 2 paths now:
1. Take these models, fix them to match BMS DB and integrate.
2. Create a totally new F-4 model in the “new” standard (e.g 1 bug texture instead of many small ones).Cheers!
-
Yoni,
Both ways are fine. Do you have a way to digitally stitch the Phantom textures from the set to a single? Else, manually remapping the textures to the model would be a pretty big task and then reskinning - that would make integration take months. I think all total I probably have 6 months of time dedicated to the phantom models and skins. The question I would have is will the phantoms work acceptably well in BMS with multiple textures? If so, maybe in the interest of time you would select option 1 above.
I am also aware of Jan Has’ excellent new F4 model - unfortunately , it appears that he is releasing only the C, D, and DSK - nothing further is planned. I wrote Jan today asking for clarification. I also don’t know if his model is fair game to include. It is on his website for download - so maybe just personal use and not necessarily inclusion to BMS? That would be a matter to clarify. Judging from what I view in OGLLOD it is a really nice model. Manos1981 was testing it and that is about where things stopped. I would think that with a few hours of a proficient 3DS modelers time - the remainder of the variants could be produced rather easily. Jan Has might be persuaded to give his PSDs and that would expedite skinning as well. Any, that is another option. So, it appears you have one sure alternative now and possibly another with Jan Has if he is willing.
If any questions come up about the models, data, etc - I can provide detailed files for integration, otherwise if you guys have FF6, all the data can be lifted/exported pretty easily too - the only issue is deconflicting records/CTs the usual DB stuff that only the DB guru loves to do, hehehe
-
In reviewing the overall memory size (excluding poly counts):
The texture count:
- Jan Has did a better job of cutting down the quantity of the textures - a full set for his model only has 6 textures; but the size and quantity is as follows: 1 2048x2048 and 5 1024x1024 versus 9 textures (4 512x512 and 5 1024x1024 )on the FF Phantom. In terms of memory size JanHas carries the equivalent of 9 1024 textures versus 6 1024 textures for the FF model.
Model Size:
- Jan Has has a model that is about 9 times the size of the FF model with 4.5MB vs 512KB. In other words you can load nearly the entire set of FF Phantoms for less than the equivalent two model by JanHas.
I am not sure if these are important considerations but the FF model was pretty heavily tested to have a low impact on frame rates. The model was surprisingly slim after WaveDave’s Node Fuser was run on it.
Assuming that the FF models can be fixed by dedicated modelers - all the necessary data, hardpoints, weapons, skins, everything for 14 variants is pretty much ready to go. The beauty of this model is that besides a few minor differences - if you have one model done it can be applied across them all since the real differences are on the nose and tail and a few bumps and antenna. So, whether you choose one or the other or both, the work really only needs to be applied to one model to fix the basic issues or add variant differences and you are pretty much done.
Another approach could be to adopt both sets of models - C, D, DSK from Jan Has integrate separately and add everything else from the FF6 database that is desired, so you get the best of both and open the door to perhaps sequentially replace the old FF6 models as desired.
-
Hi Ranger822,
if you check Janhas aggressor skins in 4.33u1 maybe you can have an idea about 1 skin per model and do the same for your phantom model.
Regards
dema
-
There is definitely something nice about loading a lot of skin options inside the model. But, I am not sure what sort of additional burden that plays on frame rates. I haven’t really ever tested it. When you add 1024 or 2048 size textures and you need 6 to 9 textures per set - that starts adding a lot of fat to the install, since only one skin is used at a time. Also, not sure about how BMS handles multiple skin sets in game. ATO can generate stuff and my experience in testing in FF was that you got unpredictable AI generated a/c in game - so if you don’t want some odd-ball skins showing up in campaign, it is best to factor that into the model/texture sets up front. The other thing is the skin sets for models could have been better managed by DB guys of years past - me included - in trying to give folks lots of choices, we fattened up the texture folder and then lost count of what went with what - it became apparent to me that over the years, with various masters of the DB in various groups - we lost track of what was used and what wasn’t and later became quite a chore to go back thru and id unused textures and back that out to what model used to used it and that was no longer using it . . . in retrospect, one texture set per model simplifies that quite a bit. It also simplifies changing out skins, theoretically speaking of course - ie if you develop a spreadsheet for what models use what textures, which most DB guys would have anyway - just publish that the install in the administrative section with tools or whatever and then users will know exactly what skins they can swap out for their favorite ac. BTW, in MacFalcon, Rick Priors’ version of MacLODEditor (the original LODEditor by the way) had a simple button set to swap out the a/c texture set - so you could load in your texture sets to a folder point to it and swap out your textures rather easily - that was before the textures were externalized to a DDS folder. I kind of liked that feature. Skinners would post up their “package” skin set and all a user had to do was to selected the package click import and it was done. To the same degree you can do that with DDS folder now as long as you know what textures go with your a/c - but sometimes you can pork your skin sets by not knowing which set you are using or you accidentally change out only a partial set on one set and the other part on a different set. I am probably making it way more complicated than it should be but textures are one of those addictive things in Falcon that everyone loves to have more of but has also led us down a path of sometimes having too much stuff in the wrong place and losing sight of the more important aspects of Falcon like stability and whether or not all the eye-candy stuff will let Falcon work. I was guilty of this addiction myself - having three years to get “cleaned up” and not get my daily Falcon fix has changed my perspective somewhat.
-
I read thru Jan Has’ EULA for his phantom and skin - if I read it correctly, users have license to edit/modify/release but not for profit, etc. So, this opens up long term possibilities for this model
-
Thanks for your kind words Ranger. I worked also a bit the hardpoint of JanHas model as well so it would be normal. Therefore i had some problens to other things. It would be nice if i could find a tool to convert lods to 3ds. I have one but the too complicated lods it doesnt work… unfortunatelly. As for September… i think i could find some time to get around again the basic lod i guess
Στάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
I don’t know of good tool for LOD to 3DS. Maybe WaveyDave knows of a tool. LOD is not friendly to work with. Yes, I notice Jan Has F4’s have only 9 slots - I made FF phantoms with 13 this simplifies the aim9 racks on inboard pylon. But it can work with nine just depends on how you configure the racks and hard points.
-
In reviewing the overall memory size (excluding poly counts):
The texture count:
- Jan Has did a better job of cutting down the quantity of the textures - a full set for his model only has 6 textures; but the size and quantity is as follows: 1 2048x2048 and 5 1024x1024 versus 9 textures (4 512x512 and 5 1024x1024 )on the FF Phantom. In terms of memory size JanHas carries the equivalent of 9 1024 textures versus 6 1024 textures for the FF model.
Model Size:
- Jan Has has a model that is about 9 times the size of the FF model with 4.5MB vs 512KB. In other words you can load nearly the entire set of FF Phantoms for less than the equivalent two model by JanHas.
I am not sure if these are important considerations but the FF model was pretty heavily tested to have a low impact on frame rates. The model was surprisingly slim after WaveDave’s Node Fuser was run on it.
Assuming that the FF models can be fixed by dedicated modelers - all the necessary data, hardpoints, weapons, skins, everything for 14 variants is pretty much ready to go. The beauty of this model is that besides a few minor differences - if you have one model done it can be applied across them all since the real differences are on the nose and tail and a few bumps and antenna. So, whether you choose one or the other or both, the work really only needs to be applied to one model to fix the basic issues or add variant differences and you are pretty much done.
Another approach could be to adopt both sets of models - C, D, DSK from Jan Has integrate separately and add everything else from the FF6 database that is desired, so you get the best of both and open the door to perhaps sequentially replace the old FF6 models as desired.
I rather wish to see in core DB the FF models because they already have lots of skins and they are enough detailed. To me is not neccessary a 50k poly 3D model, and because of shadows and other effects it is not so useful to work with such highpoly 3D models.
-
I will agree with molni (therefore janhas models are beauties) The FF models needs some retouches only… to be closer to the real thing other than that they are ok. minir changes actually… working on the original f4e from FF i saw than the horizontal fins back arent 100% identical… the nose isnt 100% correct size as the canopy as well. Theese are the minor changes. Other changea i wanna see or try to fix maybe is the outter slats (S-F-E-I) forgive me if i forget a variant. And moving exaust cones of course.
Στάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
And of course modeling the AIM-9 stations independently from inner wing HP to make possible all time to carry AIM-9s.
-
Molni that would be awesome also… it tried to do that but i didnt succeed…
I gues if i try harder i will and if i learn the secrets of lodeditorΣτάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Also to that matter i Janhas rails for aim 9 is awesome. All i need to figure out is the slot of the actual rails how it will be attached to the inner wing hp cause when i tried i had 2 double rails in each hardpoint. Lol… i will say again im not a 3d modeler im doing trial and error…
Στάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Molni that would be awesome also… it tried to do that but i didnt succeed…
I gues if i try harder i will and if i learn the secrets of lodeditorΣτάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
As I can remember the LODs what you gave to me my Korea '80s mod had these HP tweaks.
At the first cut, F-4F with 2xAIM-9s and under Mk-84.
-
I mean to have 1 lod for the rails that its not “fixed” on the plane but its visible only when u use the aim 9 s but many airforces actually never moved them so its kind of ok i guess.
Στάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
This thread was a nice read . . . so how many the new F-4s have actually been integrated to DB’s?
I can give some back info for clarity. I believe the original F-4 LOD came by way of Thoarek. He developed the model, gave it to me as a parting gift, and I then adapted with both CCC’s and WaveyDaves help. The original model had quite a few issues - and I have long since lost my work list of issues that were systematically removed. I do recall the issue with the hardpoints, landing gear, and so forth. Many additional tweaks were done after the model was adopted into RV/FF DXMs. Once that occurred, I believe WaveyDave reset the entire model since the centerline was slightly off when he viewed the model in 3DS or whatever program he used to tweak it. Also, there are still considerable autoshade issues that existed with the LOD model and those were for the most part corrected using DXedit. Another point was I found quite a few parts of the wing were not flush with the main wing - specifically the slats, airbrakes, underside wheel covers - - in short the model was still kind of rough when it was adopted and I periodically went back and clean a few things up everytime I revisited the set. I couldn’t see a lot of that stuff in LOD editor because it was a bit clunky for model work where as DXedit was used on an Apple 30" monitor and I was able to see a lot of detail and fix things. Unfortunately, the very best version of all the Phantoms and all my other model work was in FF6. The list of fixes is simply too numerous to mention and I am unsure if those DXM models can be reversed back to 3ds and then back to LOD. If so, I have detailed files of all the DXMs from the four theater DBs in FF6; Korea, ITO2, Taiwan, Aegean, not to mention the Falklands which was never formally released but was rather far along.
I would also encourage the use of a single skin. I integrated nearly all ITO2 models with multiple skin sets using old code that used squadron numbers matched to the skin sets. For FF I think that worked pretty well but I am not sure about how BMS codes handles multiple skin sets now. That might be why there were some issues with Phantoms with more than one skin set. The easier thing to do is to swap out skin sets - manually if you want to enjoy different paint schemes. Also, to be honest, we found AI in FF6 still didn’t seem to handle the skin sets properly, so despite setting the skin sets, ATO would generate a/c at places that I didn’t expect - and seemed more random than predictable. I didn’t really bother to investigate that.
I also noticed one particular variant is still missing - the RF-4 . . . I think that is a model that I couldn’t locate an LOD for - I can’t recall now if CCC or WaveyDave or someone made me a nose piece and I somehow added it to the F4B or C or something like that using DXedit.
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b94/ranger822/RF-4ETuAF.jpg
Another point to note is that I do have the PSD’s for the Phantom skins if anyone is interested in making new skins … that area really big files but - make skinning a snap.
I wasn’t clear if JanHaas has his own F4 Phantom model - if it is better by all means press forward and upgrade! However, a model set like the Phantoms represent quite a body of work and adopting a new model should be given careful thought because it involves a lot of time and effort and whatever is choosen for upgrade really needs to demonstrate a significant improvement to warrant the effort. The other thing to think about is how much resolution and refinement does one really require in Falcon - many models when viewed from more than a few hundred yards are not that easy to tell from much older primitive models. My approach was to first think of Falcon as using a primary model - it all began with the F-16. That is really where the strength and effort for the game is and should be. However, for folks like myself, I like the idea of having some other choices even if they are more primitive (which from an integration standpoint might prove easier) - The F-4 Phantom in the late 60’s and 70s, for the US, was much like the F-16 was for the 80’s to present. Depending on the theater, a primary model is the model that takes center stage for a campaign. For ITO2 - 6 Days War it was clearly the Mirage IIIC, for Falklands it was the Harrier for Britain and the Mirage for Argentina. So, picking a primary model to develop is no simple or easy task. But, if you dedicate a team effort towards doing that you can develop some pretty unique experiences for the flyers. In fact, that is a good approach for anyone considering theater work.
You can find this Rf-4 in EMF theater if there is around a download mirror
-
I mean to have 1 lod for the rails that its not “fixed” on the plane but its visible only when u use the aim 9 s but many airforces actually never moved them so its kind of ok i guess.
Στάλθηκε από το SM-J500F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
Huh, I do not understand this post. In my MOD all F-4s has separated AIM-9 stations as should be.