Mathijs Kok

Aerosoft A318/A319/A320/A321/A330 Professional Preview (part 5)

Recommended Posts

Important Post
Normal Post
19 minutes ago, Stefan Hoffmann said:

Of course Mathijs. There were times in past when devs used realworld imagery or handpained assets in their models. Nowadays with helps from mathematics we got

stochastic light solutions which simulate the way billions of photons take their through a virtual space and interact with surfaces.

So when you build a 3d representation, setup the materials correctly and run the calculations you get the visual footprint of the solution. When you look straight onto it, you will see no difference to a photorealistic 3dmodel rendered in cinema quality. And also at 45 degs viewing angle you get very good result without actually adding a single polygon to the realtime 3d model. The only downside is that you have to wait some time for the presentation, as the first step is the creation of complete model.

So in opposite to a pixel for pixel advance of traditinal pixeling you sit a longer time on the 3d model, but the final actual generation of the pixel takes then only a fraction of the time. And yes, at that degree of detail the modern way is still much faster...

 

 So, excuse the total ignorant question: if what you say is that you have to wait until it renders wouldn’t that cause stutters I don’t know if frame losses but stutters in slower computers while you wait for it to render and leave an unsmooth/jerky visual representation? Would it be that the traditional painting mode consumes more memory but is faster? Again, a question from a completely ignorant person in this process… 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 28 Minuten, walterg74 sagte:

 

 So, excuse the total ignorant question: if what you say is that you have to wait until it renders wouldn’t that cause stutters I don’t know if frame losses but stutters in slower computers while you wait for it to render and leave an unsmooth/jerky visual representation? Would it be that the traditional painting mode consumes more memory but is faster? Again, a question from a completely ignorant person in this process… 

1. This workflow is a projection from geometry space to pixel space. So the result is a texture.

2. As there is texture space reserverd in the bay already, the later performance not changes in any way.

3. Traditional painting is compared to this method in a higher grade unflexible for high precission work. There are paint tools out there where you directly paint onto the model, however that makes more sense for dirt, scratches and other organic and local things. Also painting directly into a pixel canvas gives out pixel level results, whereas rendering gives sub pixel precision which gets the most out of a texture.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you understand why modeling an aircraft has become so complex? And time consuming? 

 

Stefan made the images below for a professional client interested in a A320 model, this afternoon. These are images from 3d Max, so not exported to the platform (that could be P3D, X-Plane, AFS2 etc). If you look at them you see they have all the details, but none of the smoothness and the lighting is 'raw'. What makes a modeler a seriously good modeler these day is to understand the whole pipeline between the model and the sim. You need to be able to anticipate how what you are modeling will look in the compiled version. What you have to model and what you can do with bitmaps (bump maps, reflections etc etc). And try to keep in mind that with every new generation of hardware things change. Sometimes display of vertices (the 'model') becomes faster, sometimes the bitmap pipeline becomes faster. 

 

image.png

 

image.png

 

Compare those images to this:

Screenshots_A319LHNEU_20180216_001.png

 

or this...

2018-2-13_18-21-35-595.png

...where the sim display engine has done its work. See how things smooth out? How the lighting is many times more complex? That's what Stefan does in his mind the whole time. And because he can he is effective and productive. Because between the model in the tool and the model in the sim are many steps of compiling, copying etc etc. If you need to compile every 10 minutes you will never get a project done. You need to work for a few hours and compile in your mind, then test and fix. 

 

P3D is not even close to what a real modern display engine can do. And that makes things even harder because we have to learn, adapt and above everything else experiment. If you would work for the big game engines like Unity, Frostbite etc you can use the experience of thousands of people. Here it is a very tiny group of people, supported in a brilliant way by Lockheed, that do all the work. We lose days, often weeks experimenting to get something done. Sometimes without results, that's when a project manager like me needs to take a long walk with the dogs followed by a glass of wine. 

 

But as I said before, I honestly believe Stefan is the most experienced and the best aircraft modeler for our platform. More than a decade of 50 to 60 hours a week experience is hard to beat. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now