YYZatcboy Posted January 31, 2010 Report Share Posted January 31, 2010 http://www.czvr.ca/_Pilot_Resources/_Charts/index.phpThere is a good resource for those interested in flying in Saab 340 Territory. Pacific Coastal flies 340's. Their destinations are Hub: VancouverAnahim LakeBella BellaBella CoolaCampbell RiverComoxCranbrookKlemtuMassetPort HardyPowell RiverTrailVictoriaWilliams Lake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goran_M Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Getting there...The obj props have not been added yet and lights are still to be accurately positioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WombatBoy Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 It looks amazing :o :o I can't wait to fly this one Goran. Your planes always look so nice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobofat Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 sweet! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goran_M Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Another one.Don't get too excited. It's not a sim screenshot. But it sure took me by surprise when it popped in my dropbox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlaHaldor Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Lol Goran! Look, I'm not the only one saying "sweet". Stop bullying me for that. ;DThe render looks good. I could easily believe the tail section was real. Looking forward to play around with this one at LEMU, if the runway isn't too narrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
six7 Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Wow, Saab 340 looks fantastic. Nicely done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kesomir Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Don't know if it's a perspective trick, but the front wheel looks like it's off the ground (compare shadow with a/c behind it).Looks very nice though - cockpit shots! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlaHaldor Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 XP always looks like that at my place when the camera is too far down to the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gjalp Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Why is everyone so worried about what the wheels look like? Mine are always retracted because I am always flying I can see this little beauty popping in and out of the small NZ runways (Greymouth, Hokitika, Timaru etc....), for a very long time to come. I can see it now.... Slainte,AndyNZCH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YYZatcboy Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Nice! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goran_M Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Wow, Saab 340 looks fantastic. Nicely done Many thanks.Don't know if it's a perspective trick, but the front wheel looks like it's off the ground (compare shadow with a/c behind it).Looks very nice though - cockpit shots! I'm looking into that. Like Ola said, it appears to be an x plane issue, but I'll try to get it looking right.Cockpit is being overhauled (textures). Won't take long. Maybe another few days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TheoGregory Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 We've just (well me actually ) repainted the entire Saab 340 and have put the paint resolution to 200px/m* approx which gives us the possibility to add huge amounts of detail including all the rivets, panel lines and even the little chips of paint that have come of the fuselage as a result of long hours in the sky.* To give you some bearings, the PMDG MD-11 has a 37px/m paint kit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlaHaldor Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 I love the fact that the fuselage will have great amounts of detail. BUT how is this comparable to a MD11? I know very little about the SAAB and MD11, but I think they don't compare well due to lenght?.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reuben Posted February 1, 2010 Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 Don't know if it's a perspective trick, but the front wheel looks like it's off the ground (compare shadow with a/c behind it).Looks very nice though - cockpit shots! Mate, thanks. I'm aware of that. Pretty much aware of all these issues, but one deal with each problem on an individual basis. As Goran said, the shots we show you are just quick screens and don't reflect a perfected model with everything ironed out. The front wheel of which you speak, for instance, is just a matter of moving it on the y axis so it actually touches the tarmac...5 second job, but as I said, there are other more pressing issues which we're looking at first. Rest assured, this will be fixed and the other texture anomalies you see the other screen shots. Thanks for the comments. Keeps us all ticking.... Anyway, I'd better get back to work before Goran shoots me for being on the forum instead. lolReuben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goran_M Posted February 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2010 I love the fact that the fuselage will have great amounts of detail. BUT how is this comparable to a MD11? I know very little about the SAAB and MD11, but I think they don't compare well due to lenght?.. Not meaning to sound like I'm bashing PMDG, but 37px/m would look better on an aircraft the size of the Saab (less area to cover) than the MD11. Theo has basically crammed more into a smaller package to make sharper and clearer detail.Goran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hobofat Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 This is resolution level, 37px/m doesn't look good on any size aircraft, in my opinion. The more px/m you throw onto a larger size aircraft, the more textures are required, is all. But for a comparison, McPhat Studios creates payware paint packages for MSFS, which are absolutely stunning. There highest resolution package comes in at 283px/m, and the next highest one is 253 px/m. The amount of detail one can create at this level is enormous.So 200px/m for this Saab is most awesome! Will give repainters a lot of options for the small details, and super sharp textures. Thanks for this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlaHaldor Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 The reason I kicked on this comparison is that X-Plane has an upper limit of 2048px. So when you're going to texture the B747 - it won't really be a good sales point to say "we have a x pixels per meter", since it will drop dramatically the longer the plane is. By all means, I think the details in the SAAB is incredible and I think that alone stands by itself without making a joke out of others - which also is kind of a "shooting myself in the foot" strategy, like Microsoft and Apple does with their ad campaigns where they get blood on their hands for trying to kill each others products either directly or indirectly.So, how long is a MD11? How many pixels per meter could you make it have? Not as low as 37 I guess, but again - I'd rather see images than a whole lot of crazy bragging about it. Just my two minutes worth of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 X-Plane has an upper limit of 2048px. So when you're going to texture the B747 - it won't really be a good sales point to say "we have a x pixels per meter", since it will drop dramatically the longer the plane is. If you break up the fuse or other sections of the plane into multiple obj files then you can still achieve the hi-res result. Whether or not your computer will love you for it is a whole other story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TheoGregory Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 X-Plane has an upper limit of 2048px. So when you're going to texture the B747 - it won't really be a good sales point to say "we have a x pixels per meter", since it will drop dramatically the longer the plane is. Yes but your forgetting that X-Plane's ability to zoom in on the aircraft is directly proportional to the aircraft size. The bigger the aircraft, the less texture size needed as you are looking at it from further away.Also we wont mention 'x' pixel/m for larger planes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerrenceK Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 The reason I kicked on this comparison is that X-Plane has an upper limit of 2048px. So when you're going to texture the B747 - it won't really be a good sales point to say "we have a x pixels per meter", since it will drop dramatically the longer the plane is. So, how long is a MD11? How many pixels per meter could you make it have? Not as low as 37 I guess, but againI am not sure you get the whole px/m ratio thing, as it is not necessarily tied to the max size of the tile (or map). We do -like somebody above stated- 283 px/m on our latest textures, by blowing up the kit so it fits snug into 4096 tiles. BUT the developer could have achieved the same thing by mapping the original fuselage 4 times as big.Also, as it is a ratio, it doesn't really matter how long the actual plane is. 37 px/m will look 'bad' on a 747, but will look equally bad on a 172. Both depict a meter on the actual plane in 37 pixels on the kit.Now, I'd like to say hello. I bumped into Goran the other day, and decided to sign up. I've been checking out the X-Plane community for quite some time now, watching closely what happens, who does what, who's who and what's the scoop... I still don't have a clue, but I guess I am getting there. I must say that with some of the projects scheduled to be released for X-Plane, it looks like X-Plane is going to have a stronger line up for 2010 than MSFS.I see a lot of dedication, a lot of fine modelling (especially here on the x-pilot forum) but also : a lot of friendly messages and interaction between users. I am not going to do any comparison between simulators, as some people in the MSFS corner might get upset (see how I linked the 37 px/m to a 747 and a 172, some of you might know why), but you guys have a pretty good thing going on here.Alright, time to stop and to get to work! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goran_M Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 Great to see you have signed up, Terrence.You're more than welcome to share any texturing tips with us, should you have the time.Thanks for showing an interest in X-Plane.(BTW, for those of you that don't know, Terrence is Lead Designer for McPhat Studios)CheersGoran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike4368 Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 Hi allI have just found this site and am looking forward to the SAAB 340B. I have got around 9000 hours in the actual aeroplane, both A and B models, fantastic turboprop.Flight Factory Simulations did a great job on the SAAB 340 for FlightSim, it will be great to have a good one in X-plane.Have no hesitation in charging enough to make a profit and stay in business as FFS fell by the wayside unfortunately although I am not sure exactly why.This is a useful site for most aircraft systems and other documentation, the link is to the SAAB area...http://www.smartcockpit.com/plane/saab/SAAB-340/Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OlaHaldor Posted February 2, 2010 Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 OK Terrence, I guess you're right. It just didn't make any sense to me to compare two planes in way different scales. But then again I've never claimed to be a rocket scientist. ;D 3D is some of what I do - texturing is usually not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goran_M Posted February 2, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2010 Hi allI have just found this site and am looking forward to the SAAB 340B. I have got around 9000 hours in the actual aeroplane, both A and B models, fantastic turboprop.Flight Factory Simulations did a great job on the SAAB 340 for FlightSim, it will be great to have a good one in X-plane.Have no hesitation in charging enough to make a profit and stay in business as FFS fell by the wayside unfortunately although I am not sure exactly why.This is a useful site for most aircraft systems and other documentation, the link is to the SAAB area...http://www.smartcockpit.com/plane/saab/SAAB-340/MikeGreat to see you Mike and thanks heaps for using my forums to introduce yourself! Good to see more MSFS users getting a taste of X Plane and liking what they see.Hopefully more will follow you in the transition and see the benefits of BOTH sims. (Of course with a strong preference towards X Plane!) CheersGoran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.