GrimDude wrote:
> 
>   heh, okay.
>   14'-1/4" for the D-model Mustangs stationed in Europe. I understand they
> were a little longer for the Pacific theatre. The frequencies in use at the
> time are probably well known, but were not included in this reference
> ("Detail and Scale"; issue 8251, volume 51; Squadron Signal Publications,
> 1997). I could find out more, but the rest of my volumes are packed away too
> deep. <G>

  Thanks for the input.

>   Some of the problems I am seeing in the model I created are:
> 1) Close ports and seams seem to be swamped by ambient light. Check out the
> bright radiator inlet, and rudder hinge line. Perhaps a problem with
> distance_maximum?

  "distance_maximum?" ?

   Perhaps the amount of diffused finish used but more likely caused
 by phong highlighting in the metallic finish statement or a combination
 of the two. Remove the phong if it's in there and try specular instead.
 I like to try amounts starting with specular 0.6 roughness 0.001 to
 0.0001 for really tight highlights.
 
> 2) I applied the decals (image_maps) only to the opposite side of the
> aircraft, without clipping. Big mistake. I should remove them or do them
> right.

  Yup !
 
> 3) The painted surfaces are darkening unrealistically, or so I feel. If
> anyone has a clue as to why this is, let me in on it :)

    How far is the light source from the object. I have noticed a more
 uniform lighting model when the light source is greater than say 200
 -300 pov units from the object. It seems to give more proximity related
 traits inside the 100-200 pov unit range and even more so from 100-0.
    Try different light source distances and evaluate the changes they
 make in the appearence of the model. Also try a silver colored fill
 light to add to the reflected color from the aircrafts surface.
 Couldn't hurt to experiment a bit at this point.

   Finish statements are of course always suspect when a texture, or
 pigment with finish, does not perform as expected.
 
> 4) The aircraft panel lines have been ignored by choice. The model has
> already exceeded 8megs, and that's enough. If, I ever get things looking
> good, I may go back and clip out the individual panels.

  I'll fix the roof as soon as it stops raining. (cough)
 
> 5) Wingtips are a b****. <G> Nuff said.

  Tapered swept wingtips are a serious B**** !!! Nuff indeed.
 
> Further criticisms welcome.

I've had my say thank you.
 
> GrimDude
> vos### [at] arkansasnet

-- 
Ken Tyler

mailto://tylereng@pacbell.net

Post a reply to this message