Page 2 of 2

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:39 pm
by :FI:Sneaky_Russian
:FI:AltarBoy wrote:Falky. Go over that skin again. Look at the top of the Henschel. It's inconsistant with the rest of the camo scheme. It looks good otherwise. And while you're at it could you make a ham and cheese sandwich for me? :lol:
Well, looking at the banding on the top fuselage , it looks like 1 pixel stretched all the way over in the mat.

How ya gonna fix that?

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:45 pm
by :FI:Falcon
No, no NO Sneaky!

In a few areas near the back it takes a whole TWO pixels to stretch all the way across the back.

Yeah, some of these old ai planes seem to have received less attention to detail. There are many compromises to make when skinning them,

but thanks for the inputting of input that you are putting in AB.


;)


Falcon

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:15 pm
by AltarBoy
but thanks for the inputting of input that you are putting in AB.
Ok, Falky but what about that sandwich, huh? :lol:

When the new rig gets in next week I'll have to load up 1946 and look up a blank template of the Henschel and see what's up with it.

Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:54 pm
by :FI:Sneaky_Russian
Now if it was 3, well you might be able to do something with it ;)

Posted: Fri Nov 16, 2007 8:05 am
by :FI:Gurberly
I'd like a copy despite the dodgy top coat ;)

G

I already got one, Gurb...

Posted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 1:47 am
by :FI:Heloego
...and it the topcot doesn't affect the flying cahractistics at all...

...I think. :oops: