CiTrus90's 3D Drawings of Unbuilt Aircraft

As usual, thanks for all of the great renders, especially the tailless 2406. It's on my to do list for MSFS, along with many others from this site. It's nice to see it in 3D.
 
Hi Luca,

I saw your render of the Northrop Grumman Switchblade, nice model, but the render does not do wonders to show the model...
I did some edits on your render and have made 2 variants of it.
I think you wanted to do a nighttime shot?
But it also could have been a dayrender with a bad colorspace :)
My advise is to push the colors a bit more, to make the whole image pop.
A nice comparison would be your Lockheed Martin VS-07:
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/attachments/vs-07-9a-small-jpg.686489/
And mine:
https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/usbp19cover.jpg
Feel free to contact me if you need any assistance :)
Just offering some help.

Best regards,

Rob
 

Attachments

  • NG Switchblade - 23A small-combi.jpg
    NG Switchblade - 23A small-combi.jpg
    705.8 KB · Views: 202
BAROBA said:
Hi Luca,

I saw your render of the Northrop Grumman Switchblade, nice model, but the render does not do wonders to show the model...
I did some edits on your render and have made 2 variants of it.
I think you wanted to do a nighttime shot?
But it also could have been a dayrender with a bad colorspace :)
My advise is to push the colors a bit more, to make the whole image pop.
A nice comparison would be your Lockheed Martin VS-07:
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/attachments/vs-07-9a-small-jpg.686489/
And mine:
https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/usbp19cover.jpg
Feel free to contact me if you need any assistance :)
Just offering some help.

Best regards,

Rob
Click to expand...
Hi Baroba! I wanted to do a dusk/dawn shot, so with a darker background while the aircraft at altitude is still partially illuminated by the sun.
I'm certainly biased, but your edits seem a bit too extreme with the contrast and color saturation. But I admit that may be just a matter of personal preferences and people might prefer your edits to my original.
What (I think) I really struggle with is texturing (creating all the different texture maps) and photo bashing (mostly).
I'd love to be able to make a cohesive picture that pops out, but I think it's more of a matter of lightning than the use of colors?
For example, a couple of artists whose works I really love are Antonis Karidis and Ronnie Olsthoorn and they don't necessarily always push the contrast and saturation too much, yet their pictures feel "vivid" through the use of light.
A couple of examples of what I mean:

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

At least that's where I feel I'm really limited at the moment. I can do textures and I can do photo bashing (both not very well :p), but putting them together to obtain a "realistic" feel (which mind you, for me doesn't mean doing something in a photorealistic way but rather in the ability to convey a feeling), is something I'm unable to do.
 
CiTrus90 said:
BAROBA said:
Hi Luca,

I saw your render of the Northrop Grumman Switchblade, nice model, but the render does not do wonders to show the model...
I did some edits on your render and have made 2 variants of it.
I think you wanted to do a nighttime shot?
But it also could have been a dayrender with a bad colorspace :)
My advise is to push the colors a bit more, to make the whole image pop.
A nice comparison would be your Lockheed Martin VS-07:
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/attachments/vs-07-9a-small-jpg.686489/
And mine:
https://www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com/usbp19cover.jpg
Feel free to contact me if you need any assistance :)
Just offering some help.

Best regards,

Rob
Click to expand...
Hi Baroba! I wanted to do a dusk/dawn shot, so with a darker background while the aircraft at altitude is still partially illuminated by the sun.
I'm certainly biased, but your edits seem a bit too extreme with the contrast and color saturation. But I admit that may be just a matter of personal preferences and people might prefer your edits to my original.
What (I think) I really struggle with is texturing (creating all the different texture maps) and photo bashing (mostly).
I'd love to be able to make a cohesive picture that pops out, but I think it's more of a matter of lightning than the use of colors?
For example, a couple of artists whose works I really love are Antonis Karidis and Ronnie Olsthoorn and they don't necessarily always push the contrast and saturation too much, yet their pictures feel "vivid" through the use of light.
A couple of examples of what I mean:

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

At least that's where I feel I'm really limited at the moment. I can do textures and I can do photo bashing (both not very well :p), but putting them together to obtain a "realistic" feel (which mind you, for me doesn't mean doing something in a photorealistic way but rather in the ability to convey a feeling), is something I'm unable to do.
Click to expand...
Dusk/dawn shots are completely different in regards to colors ( usually called golden hours, because of the lightcolor)
Mine are a bit on the harder side of the spectrum, but it could be worse ;) I come from a product visualisation background were everything has to pop.
texturing is one of the hardest parts of 3D... A program that could help is Substance Painter, but there are also some free alternatives like Blender or Armorpaint ( and a few others, but Substance is the industry standard).
But you can also make your textures in Photoshop or similar program.
I think you specular and roughness maps are missing? The different materials ( like those wing reflectors and the paint of the decals) are not there. I don't see a difference. Also I don't see a lot of bumps on your models, some maps that will add some subtle height differences on your meshes. A decal has some thickness, a edge is never perfectly aligned to the next surface, a rivet, a port or a door, or the fuselage experiencing pressure differences.

A workaround could be to cut the parts with different materials and assign them a different material. I have used that technique too a lot of times. The only downside it that it will harder to change the mesh afterwards. Always save a different version of your mesh before starting to cut the model.
Texturing is a long process and it takes a lot of tries to get it to look good, is is also an exercise in coordinating all your maps ( which Substance helps a lot with).
Photobashing is an art in itself :)
Mostly it is the art of looking at a picture and being able to tell where the light comes from and what it properties are. Usually it is one main light ( the sun, hard shadows, almost white light) and bouncelight ( clouds or the ground, soft shadows, colored) and combining them in such a way that the subject is lit correctly. It is a process of trail and error.
Conveying a feeling is a difficult one, I would suggest to find a image that gives you the feeling you want and try to recreate it. Conveying a feeling is a ability that the Jedi don't talk about... ;)
 
F.L. said:
Wahoo, could you show more of this aircraft ?
Click to expand...

Here we go:
NG AC-WTF STOVL - 2 - front - small.jpg
NG AC-WTF STOVL - 2 - side - small.jpg
NG AC-WTF STOVL - 2 - top - small.jpg

Accuracy might leave a lot to be desired, but I had to "make do" with a screenshot from Youtube of Tony Chong's presentation of his Flying Wings and Radical Things (here part 1 and part 2, the project in question is on screen at minute 54:34).
 
CiTrus90 said:
F.L. said:
Wahoo, could you show more of this aircraft ?
Click to expand...

Here we go:
View attachment 699837
View attachment 699838
View attachment 699839

Accuracy might leave a lot to be desired, but I had to "make do" with a screenshot from Youtube of Tony Chong's presentation of his Flying Wings and Radical Things (here part 1 and part 2, the project in question is on screen at minute 54:34).
Click to expand...
Its a typo in the presentation - this is a design from 1989 AC/WFT studies (Aero Configuration / Weapons Fighter Technology) and is illustrated on P244 of Tony's Flying Wings and Radical Things book.The panel behind the canopy is for a lift jet intake while the main engines had extra inlet doors (the diamond shapes on top) and separate vertical exhausts at the rear for vertical flight mode.
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
Its a typo in the presentation - this is a design from 1989 AC/WFT studies (Aero Configuration / Weapons Fighter Technology) and is illustrated on P244 of Tony's Flying Wings and Radical Things book.The panel behind the canopy is for a lift jet intake while the main engines had extra inlet doors (the diamond shapes on top) and separate vertical exhausts at the rear for vertical flight mode.
Click to expand...

Edited accordingly now, thank you for the correction!
 
If I understood correctly, then this project was a VTOL ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom