Leen de Jager

Chilean Paratrooper

No, that certainly does`nt say it all. Mind, the default Stinson Sentinel in XP9 has a definition of...........................340 pix/mtr.

When we have aan airplane of about 75 metre fuselage-length and we use 4096 pixels to paint it on , it leaves us with a definition of approx 55 pixels per metre. 4096/75 is approx 55

Yes they exist, nevertheless is a vage phenomena. Some days ago I saw a plane being advertised as "having High Resolution textures." I downloaded hopefully a set of textures for the plane and was terribly disappointed. The cabin-windows had a size of 22x26 pixels , text on the plane was hardly readable. How come? This was advertised as High Res Textures. The explanation is simple and disappointing the same time. The publisher has no idea what he is talking about Using 4096x4096 texture-sheets is not per definition HighRes/High Defintion it depends on how many pixel per meter aircraft is available. Yes, we should not speak about texturesizes, we only should speak about " definition " This aircraft, I am talking about, has a definition of approx 55 pixels per meter wich is a very low definition. When we have aan airplane of about 75 meter fuselage-length) and we use 4096 pixels to paint it on , it leaves us with a definition of approx 55 pixels per meter. Ohh yes, another thing , what is High Resolution. In X-Plane today its 4096x , in X-Plane yesterday it was 2048x, in FlyII-Legacy its 8192x and in industrial and art photography its....................you name it. High Resolution does not say a thing. Its all about DEFINITION Some examples of planes for X-Plane and their definition: The Saab 340 by LES is approx 300 pixels per meter wich is high definition. (largest used texturesheet = 4096x) The ATR72-500 by McPhat is approx 400 pixels per meter wich is high definition too.( largest used texturesheet = 2048x ) The B200 Beechcraft by Carenado is approx 520 pixels per meter..............UHDT Ultra High Definition Textures ( largest used texturesheet = 4096x) We can use one huge texturefile for a complete fuselage and or can use five ( or more ) smaller texturesheets for it. Its all up to the developer how he want to make things. BUT !!!! Publishers should specify their definition in pixels per meter , saying something is HighRes because its made of large texturesheets gives no idea about the expected quality and level of detail of the excraft-textures. Please do not sell us nonsense, never ever talk about texturesizes. Just tell us " "Texture-definition is .... pixels per meter" pix/mtr= or pix/feet= No need to say is that, the larger the planes are the more difficult it will get to make it in an acceptable definition. Most airliners available for X-Plane have a definition between 50-100 pix/mtr wich in fact limits their beauty. Sometimes for small text-parts there are separate text-textures available for the various plackards, detailed paintwork stays problematic. So saying, my Carenado is high resolution and my Boeing 777 is high resolution too can give us false hope. Better said , my Carenado has a definition of 500pix/mtr and my Boeing 777 has a definition of 85pix/mtr. Then we get a better idea of what we can expect.. Leen de Jager

Ohh certainly not, I think we did not mis your point at all. I realise its always a pity when not being able to see things things "live". Due to my work I am not able to see many sport events live. I can assure you when the dutch team wins or looses while I am at work , I ll notice the victory or the defeat at once , hearing sounds from the streets, Results from these and other games are in the news-flashes too. Thats not ideal I know. Asking the world the hush until I have seen my videotapes..............come on , thats ...................very unrealistic. OK, my next congratulations will be adressed to the winner INSIDE the post, I was not my intention to spoil your game ,sorry for that. Leen

Really enjoyed the final and congratulate all my Australian friends. The Australian team , is a dream-team. OK they ruined our dream.( we had to much optimism and not enough quality ) They certainly deserve the victory. RESPECT!!!!! Cheers Leen

Thanks guys. I am still drunk. Ohh man, we were confident , nevertheless we did not expect this. If this continues , dutch law needs to be changed. We need to have a "Sir Louis " then. Leen

As I said before I do not like the way things develop in Europe. ( software-wise spoken) Sometimes things are not forbidden ( at some places) , nevertheless better not to do, for the sake of the subject. BUT a question was asked and the answer about the European and US situation was given. Selling second hand cars is ok , we cannot copy twenty cars in seconds. We can copy hundred Carenados within seconds and there lies the problem. OK registration-codes on-line can solve that problem Its clear software are no cars. BUT!!! When I want to buy a new car , I can collect the car of my choice at the dealer and take it for a testride. Can even com back next week for a second spin. There is no need for me to buy first and try later. There are thousands of software packages on the market giving the client the possibility of "tasting first". Strange enough thats a phenomena NOT FOR SIMMERS ( not entirely true there is a DEMO of X-Plane ) Last years I bought several sim-aircraft wich I trashed within the hour after purchase. As a painter I am interested in the EULA ( repainting rights and restrictions ) several vendors refused me to have a look at the EULA before purchase. I am talking about FSX and X-Plane aircraft , its the same "there". These things need improvement. EULA open for the prospect , not only for the guy who already paid. Trail versions of planes and other sim-related software.( complicated part of a grown up bizz) The possibility of transfer of licences ( including a reasonable fee for the vendor wich co-operation is vital ) This is already possible in the world outside our hobby , sim world just has to follow. Sometimes I think.......................OK fill this in yourself. I am confident the things will change in future, it will take a while and we should be carefull and protect our developers. The devopers and vendors need to take action, these few lines might inspire them, I really hope. I rest my case. Leen de Jager

You are right ,on the other hand , the moment european law gives re-selling of software the green light, things get interpreted differently in Europe. Fact stays ,selling second hand software will not be punished in Europe, no matter where the software comes from. On line registration is the key-word here. There is even a chance European vendors will be forced to neglect the EULAS and give service to second hand software following the european rules., or even forbid selling products having EULAS like these. A simple example is the rule about warranty there is more warranty on American cars in Europe. On my Yamaha receiver there is more warranty in the Netherlands than in Japan. You might say thats madness , I hope you are right, the same time I am doubtfull. These European developments with second-hand-software-sales are dangerous.

Yes you are right there, Thats why I wrote ; this EULA itself is illegal at this point. You must have been typing your reaction while I added "at this point" A am not a lawyer, nor native english speaking , most informative is the linked article itself. This means when re-selled software needs to be activated via the internet after being installed on the new-licence-holders-computer ( various add-ons need such a registration even periodically) the initial vendor must cooperate and has to register the new user enabeling him to use the software AND provide him with updates the same way he does with first hand users. Things get really complicated at this stage. Vendors from outside europe might refuse to co-operate ( they are not operating under european law) vendors from inside Europe can be forced to follow the european rules. This brings us to an interesting phenomena . IF you buy a licensce and you want to sell it ( after a period of use, or not ) on the second-hand-maket in Europe , just buy it at an european vendor. Developers-vendors who do not like the idea of being sold on the second hand market ( and being forced to re-activation, service and maintenance), they should just not use european resellers. No need to say, on-line activating is a good way to keep things a bit in hand.( at least outside Europe) Just providing the customer with a zip file without any need to activations is quiet normal and the same time madness. In my opinion giving the second-hand-software-market the green light is madness too. BUT thats not the question here, the question here is, is selling used software legal. For the European Community the answer is YES.

In Europe selling second hand-software (originally legal obtained) is 100% legal. This sounds odd, nevertheless its a fact. A tipical example of how things go in Europe, act first and think later. In Europe there are several companies specialized in selling second hand software. The European Supreme Court declared these transactions NOT to be illegal. They even go a step further, whenever a EULA says its not permitted to sell the software in the second hand circuit , this EULA itself is illegal at this point. So even people who agreed with the EULA during the install of the software are allowed to sell the software ( illegal restrictions do not count in European-court) 200 meters from my home there is a shop (big shop) selling second hand games. Even BOL.com ( biggest internet-shop in the Netherlands) is selling second hand games and other used-software. MIND!!!!!! I am just talking about Europe. www.computerweekly.com/opinion/EU-court-legalises-second-hand-software

Knowing the fact he is publishing paints for shady planes is enough to ban him from all fora and no further discuss the guy. I certainly do not have the intention to do so. As Peter T says , old textures new filenames. Find the textures for FSX and see , there is no difference between them and "his" paints . Except for the filenames and dates. Search and you`ll find all proof you need. ( IF you need proof ! I think you don`t )

Some information. The person invloved was banned and removed for several reasons. He offered various skinsets for illegally converted freeware planes for MSFS ( Project Opensky.) including the illegal base model. ( Project Oblivion ) These paints were NOT made by himself , he just published them under his own name. Guys like him should be banned everywhere. His personal website still exists ( just checked it a moment ago ) No need to say I cannot give the link to it, that would be advertising illegal actions.

Thats it , not more, not less. edited due to my shabby english as usual.

Yes Tom , it could not have been said it better. I hartfully agree. Removing the post. Warning and explaining for the poster. And then , when that does not help, banning. ( never a ban for life at the first incident is my policy ) In that order ONLY. Leen editing = correcting my shabby english

I can assure you it has nothing to do with X-Plane. Being active on forums (as well as in their management) who are dedicated to other sims as well, beleve me. Its the same everywhere. Not saying its bad everywhere, anyways it has nothing to do with the subjects of the fora , is all about the people at the rudder. Many fora are just like some banana-republics , they are led by small dictators. MIND Saying: Its like moving into North Korea! Thats something I personally do not tolerate on the Dutch forum of wich I am a moderator. ( NOT saying I do not agree with you!!) Our rules say : No politics. Thats why I used "some banana-republics" thats more general. edit=correcting my shabby english

Cannot find that anywhere Can find xp-developer.com ?? Must say I am visiting X-Plane .org for more than nine years now and I like the site. Once due to a misunderstanding I was banned for a couple of hours. A simple explanation by mail adressed to the management of X-Plane.org was enough to clear the sky. I am an administrator at AVSIM for many years and I can assure you , people can be banned there too ,if one does not follow the house-rules. Its possible one of the house rules is NOT advertising other X-Plane related websites. Personally I think thats not a good rule , on the other hand saying "its no good here and go there" one cannot tolerate. Many forumleaders are to sensitive and over-react. The best way to stay banned from a site is camplaining about it publicly on another site.

Hi guys, Without a bit of gloss and normals................that history now. Painting up the bird now. Cheers Leen de Jager

File Name: Ilyushin Il14-Rossiya-Russian Airlines File Submitter: Leen de Jager File Submitted: 08 Mar 2014 File Category: Heavy Metal X-Plane Version(s): X-Plane 9 & 10 Livery For: Click Here For Aircraft Ilyushin Il14-Rossiya-Russian Airlines livery by Leen de Jager Ilyushin Il14-Rossiya-Russian Airlines by Leen "Flybike" de Jager This is repaint/livery for the Ilyushin II14 made by Felis Leopard. The aircraft itself ( made by Andrey Kozyaruk aka Felis Leopard ) can be downloaded here http://www.avsimrus.com/files.phtml?search=il-14&sopt_mode=or&folder=95&sopt_title=1&sopt_desc=1&sopt_author=1&sopt_fname=1&sopt_comms=1&minrating= This plane can be used in XP9 and XP10 ( visit this post for use in XP10 http://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?showtopic=68242 ) I contacted Felis Leopard and he gave me permission to edit some OBJ-files and publish them. It was a challenge to work on the looks of this bird, adjusting platelines, improving color-matching of different parts etc. Adding normals and more detail brings this bird ,though its freeware now, to payware looks. I hope you`ll enjoy this livery as much as I enjoyed making it. MIND! If you already downloaded and installed the normals and obj files I made for this arcraft, please replace these OBJ files by the ones* wich are provided with this livery. They are better for this livery (and other liveries as well ) . HOW TO INSTALL. Unzip Rossiya.zip to a temp folder. Place the folder "LDJ-Ilyushin 14 Rossiya-Russian Airlines" in the liveries folder of the aircraft. * Place the three files from the folder named "Main-objects" in the OBJECTS folder of the aircraft ( make backup of the original objects folder FIRST) About the propeller: It is not possible to make the livery having a blue-rotating propellor , only the static prop can be included in the livery.You`ll find a file for the rotating propellors in this download.Placing this file in the main directory of the aircraft ( make a backup on the original first) wil result in a blue rotating propellor , but all other liveries will have it too. Better said the blue rotating propellors are optional. Leen de Jager http://www.flybike-paints.nl PS You`ll get the one with the grey wheels !! Click here to download this file

Why is that "sad" ? OK, its always a bit painfull to see something you bought in the past , being offered now for a few bucks or even for free. ( quiet normal in modern bizz) On the other hand , guys who cannot afford payware can be very happy with it. When a old painter from Holland puts some energy in the project and makes the plane a bit better (visually) its just a plus+plus-situation.( also for the users who bought the plane and who can update its appearance now.) Because its freeware , I was thinking, lets have a look and I started to work on the bird. That would not have happened if it was`nt free. Cheers Leen

OK its was initially made for XP9 now upgraded to XP10-64 ( they are working on the autopilot) OK, is was not so very good textured an normalmapping was missing. OK it suffers the same grayish textures due to a mistake in the OBJ files I spoke about lately. ( see for explanation this post http://forums.x-plan...939#entry786485) or http://forums.x-pilot.com/topic/6474-when-colors-are-dark-and-dull/#entry69642 BUT , once it was payware and now it is FREE With edited OBJ files and added normals it has the looks of payware. This livery including normals and customised OBJ files will be available soon.