Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: F4U Corsair profiles

  1. #1

    F4U Corsair profiles

    Attached are a couple of Corsair profiles I made recently. The second one was commissioned by Warbird Digest magazine, while the first is an adaptation of one commissioned by them earlier this year.

    Goodyear FG-1D Corsair BuNo.92513 of the Minneapolis Navy Reserve, circa 1955:
    FG-1D_95213_Minneapolis_web1200.jpg

    Vought F4U-7 Corsair BuNo.133710 as operated by 15.F Flotilla from the Arromanches aircraft carrier during the 1956 Suez Crisis:
    F4U-7_133710_web1200.jpg
    Aviation Art & Photography
    www.AviationArt.aero

    ...also for custom prints and t-shirts
    Or find me on Facebook

  2. #2
    Imperial Guard kevjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,201
    Hey Skyraider

    They look absolutely awesome. The very subtle bump map really brings it to life.

    You still doing all your textures with Photoshop or have you moved over to a 3D painting program these days ?

  3. #3
    Looks really nice. Wanted to ask the same question as kevin :-) Heared spec and bump maps are still necessary to do in Photoshop.

  4. #4
    Thanks guys!
    The Corsair is entirely old school and the F4U-7 doesn't even exist in 3D. I deformed the nose of the F4U-1D model to give me a basis for shading, then drew the rest in 2D.

    But funny you ask about 3D painting programs as I have finally taken my texturing to the next level. I have just completed my first project using the Substance Painter trial and I must say it's a huge time saver. What took days before, now takes hours. I was worried my video card would not be up to it, but my ageing Quadro did just fine (except that I was limited to 4K export, which was not a problem this time around).
    I will not be replacing my texturing methods with it (to avoid the risk of my models looking like "typical" SP-painted models), but rather augmenting them. It's great for camouflage patterns (no tedious lining up over seams) and weathering especially, but not so much for panel lines and markings (where greater accuracy is a must). With the latest version of SP you can export multi-layer PSD files, which is very useful.
    SP has various export options for different softwares and render engines and these are most useful and work excellent as long as you use the right gamma (2.2 for diffuse, 1.0 for ior, that sort of thing) and with normal maps you really need to double-check what is the accurate channel order for your render engine. I found it necessary to invert the green channel in my case.
    Aviation Art & Photography
    www.AviationArt.aero

    ...also for custom prints and t-shirts
    Or find me on Facebook

  5. #5
    Imperial Guard kevjon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,201
    Thanks Skyraider for the post. Interesting to hear where your at with your current texturing methods.

    I've purchased the indie version of SP and it only cost $75 a year to keep it going so hoping to use it more in the future. I also own 3D coat and that is also pretty good with its smart materials. So still in two minds about which way to go but will learn both in the meantime till I figure it out. I agree with you about timesaver, it is huge and doing things like mottled camouflage in 3d is so much easier.
    I've always found doing exhaust stains across wing and fuselage uvs painful in 2d where as in 3D very nice seamless results.

    For bump maps though, the old fashioned photoshop 16bit grayscale is the way to go and import that into SP or 3DC.

  6. #6
    Agree 100% Kevin!
    Aviation Art & Photography
    www.AviationArt.aero

    ...also for custom prints and t-shirts
    Or find me on Facebook

  7. #7
    Assassinator of Spammers cobra6's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Tilburg, The Netherlands
    Posts
    6,019
    SP is great for augmenting your existing texture workflow, however as the human eye is great at picking out patterns you'll always have to do quite a bit of manual labour to break these. There is only so much procedurals, even multi-layered ones, can do.

    Substance is starting to be used in film now as well, we used it quite extensively on Pacific Rim 2 for the Jaegers.
    Still, a lot of texturing is still going to be done in MARI as well as it handles multi-UDIM assets a lot more efficiently once you go over a certain amount of UDIM's.

    As Ronnie pointed out both MARI and Substance are not that suitable for panel lines yet, photoshop has some very powerful tools up it's sleeve for that but once you get to over 4 UDIM's it becomes a royal pain to manage.

    Substance also has some very lovely bakers for mesh information which can be used to great effect in MARI as basis for masks and such.

    Cobra 6

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •