Friday 2010-07-02 Dev. update and Discussion Thread

[Oleg Maddox]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Sorry Oleg, I was getting oil mixed up with fuel...

but have a look here; some excellent footage. As can bee seen in a number of cases here, like in the picture you posted, the fire is quite large and violent, but there is little smoke.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Champion...30/y6qyG4kTebE


This one is much more interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/user/Champion...27/Go6jwR5-nho

In many cases, the fire is as violent and explosive, but also in some cases the thick black smoke can be seen. However, this is quite rare to last for a long time, and in most cases the smoke is not too thick and large.

No one sample of low octan fuel that was common for German planes of that time.

We have diferent dencity of smoke for different situations. You will see it in future.

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

No one sample of low octan fuel that was common for German planes of that time.

We have diferent dencity of smoke for different situations. You will see it in future.

OK, thanks But at least, is there evidence of smoke looking like what you have shown for a continued period of time? Perhaps, i think, it is best to go by what is available in video form until some more evidence appears to show that there are other circumstances where different things can happen

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Philip.Ed:

I am almost sure most of the shots are done in tele objective. (maybe Oleg can comment on this)
Using tele objective (or other extreme lenses) distorts your 3D world to a a point like you wouldn't believe. In the movies I worked on, some sets build in 3D were one day approved, the other day rejected -- the exact same sets! Just because they were filmed one day with this lens, one day with the other. The client thought we had build something new or so--but not at all in reality. This is very hard to understand for someone that has no experience in virtual building -- and filming it for the public.
The smoke is about right in my opinion. It's heavy, but ok. It looks massive in some shots because of image composition and lens. You should wait to judge it until you see it in game.

repeatable patterns: except a solution for this when the first quantum computer comes out

[Oleg Maddox]

Originally Posted by KOM.Nausicaa

Philip.Ed:

I am almost sure most of the shots are done in tele objective. (maybe Oleg can comment on this)
Using tele objective (or other extreme lenses) distorts your 3D world to a a point like you wouldn't believe. In the movies I worked on, some sets build in 3D were one day approved, the other day rejected -- the exact same sets! Just because they were filmed one day with this lens, one day with the other. The client thought we had build something new or so--but not at all in reality. This is very hard to understand for someone that has no experience in virtual building -- and filming it for the public.
The smoke is about right in my opinion. It's heavy, but ok. It looks massive in some shots because of image composition and lens. You should wait to judge it until you see it in game.

repeatable patterns: except a solution for this when the first quantum computer comes out

Or haven't simply knowledge of photograpy and different focus leight of lenses.

In our sim the tele position is more close to 50 mm focus leght (normal) like it is for human eye.

the wider angle means wide angle lenses with all their ditortions... (less then in real lenses, but anyway presented due to perspective distortions)

Sample of wide anle is here. I don't post such shots that to do not recall some voices that the plane is incorrect in proportions. Howere we need to have wider than in a life angles due to limits of monitors view.

Sample of wide angle view in a sim.

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

In our sim the tele position is more close to 50 mm focus leght (normal) like it is for human eye.

Very interesting -- I was not able to see this. Thanks for the insight

[Dano]

Looking awesome as usual Oleg

[Matt255]

Great update as usual. I like the shots of the Ju88 aswella s the close-up of the 109. Would love a 109 in-cockpit video for one of the next updates.

Originally Posted by Oleg Maddox

Howere we need to have wider than in a life angles due to limits of monitors view.

So this means that, just like in IL2, people will be able (and will have to) change FoV to different settings, like when they are aiming at something or spotting for enemy planes?

[Oleg Maddox]

Originally Posted by Matt255

Great update as usual. I like the shots of the Ju88 aswella s the close-up of the 109. Would love a 109 in-cockpit video for one of the next updates.


So this means that, just like in IL2, people will be able (and will have to) change FoV to different settings, like when they are aiming at something or spotting for enemy planes?

On some diferent manner, but comparable.

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by KOM.Nausicaa

Philip.Ed:

I am almost sure most of the shots are done in tele objective. (maybe Oleg can comment on this)
Using tele objective (or other extreme lenses) distorts your 3D world to a a point like you wouldn't believe. In the movies I worked on, some sets build in 3D were one day approved, the other day rejected -- the exact same sets! Just because they were filmed one day with this lens, one day with the other. The client thought we had build something new or so--but not at all in reality. This is very hard to understand for someone that has no experience in virtual building -- and filming it for the public.
The smoke is about right in my opinion. It's heavy, but ok. It looks massive in some shots because of image composition and lens. You should wait to judge it until you see it in game.

repeatable patterns: except a solution for this when the first quantum computer comes out

That could make sense, yes, but I am going by what I have seen in videos from the period, and I am of the opinion that it is best to go by what evidence you have at your disposal than what may be right.
For example, despite the great damage model in Il-2, usually there are a few types of smoke seen which means that each type of smoke used for each type of aircraft damage has to be the most common type seen for that particular damage. So in some cases, the smoke might be massive, but in other cases it might be a lot smaller, and if the latter happens more than the former than this should be the type used instead.
But I don't know how the damage-model works in this sense for SoW, so I'll wait for future updates for now.
Also, I am only going by a few videos so more evidence will need to be shown to give a better judgement

[Zorin]

Hi Oleg,

I'm glad you took my Bf110 corrections seriously. As far as I can tell the loop antenna and antenna racks are now positioned correctly. I can't see the pitot tube, so can't comment on that. Yet there are still the large trim tabs(=wrong) of the 1941 E series present.