Paid Training/Assistance

#41
Boeing, do not make things too difficult on yourself.

For instance, you can just focus on the model alone. Worry about making it, texturing it, then animating parts, cutting the windows out, slapping paint on it, etc.

Dont try to climb Mount Everest in a day.

And remember, you could make a 'very simple, basic' plane to begin with, then begin improving on it.

Try this... Go to some place like FlightSim.com and look at the freeware 707's that people have made in the past for FS2004. Even FS2002 days. Look at their screenshots in the clickables of the files.

One step at a time... Focus down, not focus out... Focus on one single thing.


Nice work on the model!
 
#43
Thanks guys for the encouragement.

Lion heart, I have looked at others' work. Part of the reason I’m doing this apart from the learning aspect is because their work wasn’t convincing enough to use, emulate build on for entertainment or learning purposes. They each have their qualities but in every product there is something a little off, or way off that makes me cringe. So i don't use their work - at all. Things like 2d panels only - no 3d, incorrect behaviour or modeling such as the simple things like the Korry 81590-xxxx indicator/light that is prolific in the plane i'm modeling, the instruments used are weird and Frankenstein-ish in that some don't correlate with the instruments used in their real counter-parts. Part numbers used and that are interchangeable are prescribed in manuals and this doesn't seem to be respected in some panel renditions claiming to be accurate.

I want something a lot more detailed and reasonably accurate as compared to what is currently available and for all of these reasons, I am doing the lot. Notable mention to the Historical Jetliners Group who have done the best job i've seen for a freeware on the model i'm doing. But sadly, even in these there are minor differences i've picked up on.
 

Heretic

Resource contributor
#44
Your intentions are noble, but mind that not allowing minor artistic difference very much constrains you to one particular airframe at one particular moment in its service life, flying a particular set of routes for a particular operator in a particular livery.
And this can be taken further. Technically, parts not modeled to the measurements and tolerances of the manufacturer and without the appropriate superficial appearance pose a huge inaccuracy. Even omitting some parts altogether because they can't be readily seen is a deviation from the real thing.
You just can't get everything right.
Desire for perfectionism hinders every inch of progress (see the A350 thread in the Showroom) and will wear you out extremely quickly.
 
#46
I’m back :)

Only a brief summary. Not a lot of physical progress.
I have undergone significant amounts of time away from home for training coupled with an international move and job change, so the hobby has been parked for a while however in the meantime, in my downtime I take the opportunity to learn more about the technical details about the airplane and various modelling software, which leads me to a hurdle I encountered.

Software limitations- I’m beginning to feel that the Blender is restricting for me. Trying to create a cylindrical shape is something of a tremendous faff. I’m not sure what the experience is in 3ds max, but from review of YouTube videos, the process is rather superfluous and not as involved as it is in Blender. I suppose that’s why it costs 400 odd a month to use!

I can see myself getting rather frustrated in the ensuing years due to the limitations of freeware Blender.
 

hairyspin

Resource contributor
#47
I have Blender for curiosity although I’ve never used it seriously: Gmax and 3dsMax are what I know. I bet Blender does do whatever you want elegantly and effectively, you just haven’t discovered how yet. I had the same frustrating experience learning Gmax but would never think that now.

Patience and Google, and consider posting a question to the Blender forum here or elsewhere - that’s what we all do from time to time, even people who’ve spent 20+ years at this.
 

F747fly

Resource contributor
#48
I agree with Tom's post above. Although Blender can be challenging to learn, I think it is a very capable and versatile piece of software. Of course, just like any other piece of software used to develop 3D models, Blender has a learning curve that can be quite steep at the starting-end (I am quite confident that a lot of people on this forum can tell you all about the challenges you can face, in fact this forum is mostly to deal with such challenges). Personally I really like Blender, even for other reasons then. It being free although that is also an obvious perk. If you look around on this website you will see a number of developers who have created or are creating absolutely stunning aircraft or scenery using Blender. So it can be done, the sky is the limit really, it only takes a lot of practice. So adding to Tom's advice, I only want to say that Blender is used in so many places (some video games / simulators were even entirely developed using Blender), so while looking for information on techniques sometimes you can learn a lot from something that has nothing to do with flight simulation.

(see the A350 thread in the Showroom)
Oops...
 
Top