TOMCATZ Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 (edited) Hi, ... hm ... what should I say. Everybody knows that I`m really not a fan about higly counted models. In past I tryed to build my models with about less them 20.000 triangles. But now ED gave us the new engine and that works well. I wondered how it was possible to build so higly detailed cars and trucks without got`ing issues with performances. And so I had to realize that in future models have to show more details while using a lot of more triangles. So for examble an fully loaded Su-25 uses arround 60-70.000 triangles and it works well without any problems. I tryed to bring some little more details into my model. Here I rendered some little impressions: Uploaded with ImageShack.us That`s 40.000 triangles. Hm... Now I now that really "high detailed" models are possible as well and I really hope that a good crew`s just like 3 GO or Gyss, Yenicery or alll the other guys started to bring us so fantastic models they did in past :thumbup: My best wishes, TOM Edited July 9, 2010 by TOMCATZ 4 Born to fly but forced to work.
garengarch Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Holy mother of God 1 Vega 2700x /16Gb ram/480Gb SSD/1Tb Seagate/nVidia 2080/Win 10 64 bit Rift. T-flight pedals.
JLZ Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Okay- Think I went crazy OK, it's our turn now to went crazy... unless you provide those high poly models to us Looks excellent :thumbup: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Mustang Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Really really good looking 29! :) P.S : is there any chance this newer model will not have the problem with the afterburner flames/contrails being out of place?
Udat Posted July 10, 2010 Posted July 10, 2010 I'm speechless, tom.. Just absolutely fantastic looking mig! Intel i7-950 @stock, Asus P6X58D-E, 3x4GB Corsair Vengeance, Asus GTX 580, Corsair 120GB SSD, Corsair HX 750W PSU [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
TOMCATZ Posted July 10, 2010 Author Posted July 10, 2010 Thank you very much! Yes- That model works with conetrails but notwith the stock afterburner. I hope that some day ED will give us the chance to add fonar points and air- refuel points. My best wishes, TOM Born to fly but forced to work.
Pougatchev Posted July 10, 2010 Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) why not use the mig 29k capabilities of refueling?you can disabled the carrier cross, but the question is on your model the refueling prob is on the left or on the right?because on the 29k that's on the left... Edit: On SMT and K version that's on the left, i think that's adjustable with your great model! Amazing work's Tom! Edited July 10, 2010 by Pougatchev /
Vekkinho Posted July 10, 2010 Posted July 10, 2010 (edited) There's something wrong with the spine shape and canopy joints, 9.13 is nothing but a 9.12 with bolt on spine that doesn't blend into a fuselage and wing roots as good as it does with your 3D model. Can you make joints a bit egdy as this model kinda reminds me of SMT. http://www.myvideo.de/watch/2150231/MiG_29_SMT Wheels and rims are also a bit "pimped". Anyway nice model, I really hope for flying it in game! Edited July 10, 2010 by Vekkinho [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Oscar Posted July 10, 2010 Posted July 10, 2010 Great modeling...... I'd like to see the 'cutaway' model for this aircraft (and every other aircraft available in the DCS/FC series) be made available as a static object to populate aircraft maintenance areas at the bases. Together with other "pad" mods that include ladders, toolboxes, APUs, bomb carts, etc., these static aircraft could bring a lot more life to the air base scenes. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Vecko Posted July 10, 2010 Posted July 10, 2010 Good job Tom... Is it ,maybe,possible to see new upgraded Kuznetsov model in future? That is mine ancient wish... :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Virtual Aerial Operations
Pouka Posted July 13, 2010 Posted July 13, 2010 Very nice TOMCATZ! :wub: :thumbup: Did you get my PM? :smilewink: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
TOMCATZ Posted July 13, 2010 Author Posted July 13, 2010 Thank you guys, thank you very much. I still trye to make my models better and better step by step. But thats not importent. More importent for me personally is to make a small view into the future how a simulation could be look in future. I think that some good pictures can give more impressions and ideas as thousands of words can ever do. I wait for the day I will be able to fly a fully simulated MiG29 or F-15 as like as the Eagle Dynamics with the Ka52 did. And hopefully with so an higly detailed model as like as the Hokum. I`m not pretty sure when my small work will be complete (allways I thought I found some new issues). But I´m still very happy about any ideas and helpings. My very best wishes, TOM Born to fly but forced to work.
71st_Mastiff Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) This means , in my eyes much better damage models are now more possible? Panels blowing off exposing the engine nacelles, and braided tubings, and wires. Maybe some randomness too in the damage sequences also? Edited July 21, 2010 by Mastiff "any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back", W Forbes. "Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts", "He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," Winston Churchill. MSI z690 MPG DDR4 || i9-14900k|| ddr4-64gb PC3200 |zotac RTX 5080|Game max 1300w|Win11| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2||MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || Z10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/ G502LogiMouse || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Asus||
TOMCATZ Posted July 21, 2010 Author Posted July 21, 2010 Oh yes. The DCS engine is very strong and able to handle a big load of work. The rest is: how many times will the producers invest into a damage model or basecally - in the model himself? Theres a lot of things possible... Best wishes, TOM Born to fly but forced to work.
Pouka Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 TOMCATZ, rattler, please check PMs... :smartass: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
TOMCATZ Posted July 22, 2010 Author Posted July 22, 2010 Great PM! Thank you :thumbup: Born to fly but forced to work.
Recommended Posts