Now, while I do agree that the landing gear is a bit wonky ... so what?
This thing obeys The Rule of Cool.
It's aggressive looking, over-engineered in that "I'm a bad-ass" sort of way. Coming out of the sun, with just a hint of lens flare and the right martial march as a soundtrack this thing would look damned cool (esp. with a darker, more ominous paint scheme).
I'm not sure I'd call it a heavy fighter. All those engines and the forward swept wings which imply speed to the eye just scream "interceptor!!" to me. It's got that I Go Fast ... In a Straight Line sort of look. Reminds me of an F-14 in that. It's not remotely similar in ACTUAL shape or design to the Tomcat, but it's got that same feeling of barely chained speed.
Don't fret the criticism much. Most criticism is kindly meant, but not everyone is good at expressing it. Constructive criticism is an art form as much as model-making is ... with the added difficulty of adapting what would normally be done in speech to a text format. And tone of voice just doesn't come across with the written word unless you REALLY practice it. And, in the end, she's your beast--if YOU like it, does it really matter what we think?
That said. Change everything. The cockpit glass is too glass-like. The engines are too engine-y. And wheels? Really? A space-fighter with wheels. What's next? Missiles? :P (yes, that's sarcasm for humorous effect!!)
It's cool. It's different. And, unlike anything else I've tried ... it's COMPLETE. So, good job.
thank you, i can see what you are talking about what sort of darker paint scheme would you suggest? i only really called it a heavy fighter as it is heavier than previous fighters i have created but is about as large as fighters come in the sci fi universe i have designed it for. interesting that it reminds you of an f14 as it is closely styled on an f111 and the f14 was used for carrier operations rather than the f111b that general dynamics were tasked to develop for marine use.
That said. Change everything.
i was trying to design a fighter that had some slightly realistic features, the cockpit glass is not meant to be glass rather some toughened but transparent "super material" of the future with similar properties to the metal used for the rest of the hull. the engines are supposed to look a bit like current engines as they are bussard ramjets so would have intakes at the front. wheels are there because i thought that coupled with this design they would look better than any other type of landing gear despite the fact that some of my other designs use pads or just struts instead. thank you again, more models will follow at some point.
a long list, some are obviously true, others require a bit more thought( and then seem pretty true still). some are the sort of things you wish were not true but know are(laws:3,11,12,13,20,21,30,32,37,40). the next thing id do i will consider as many of these as i think apply(probably all of them), law number 1 shows how crap my designs may well be(yes i have calculated how much power the engines will NEED, but not whether they would actually be able to deliver it. i have calculated the kinds of forces(due to accelerations). that the pilot will be subject to without damping but NOT how the damping should be provided.) law number 39 is a bit irrelevant for this as the craft is it's own launch vehicle but i have recycled elements(engines/switches/etc) from other designs. law 2 also exposes some of my problems here as i have designed the craft to "work" with the systems functioning correctly and not(for example) with the underside engines jammed at full power, the landing gear refusing to deploy,all the shielding failed,ion columns inoperative and severed fuel pipes to the thrusters. another point about law 2 is that so many things could go wrong,it is quite a nightmare thinking of them all, often calmed only by "well that couldn't happen". thanks for sharing that list with me. what do you think of the design?
just explaining my reasoning because so many other people weren't kidding when they commented on those features. and yes i DO know. i would like to know what you think of my other designs.
these: churchill class Attachment not found.
I think you guys are having far too much fun:devil: And acting as a moderator here my job is largely to tell people to stop having fun...;) With respect to Knight, I guarantee you that none of the iconic sci-fi fighter designs you love were made using slide rules or long technical checklists...
That said the best sci-fi designers probably just know these things instinctively, like for example how expendable stores affect centre of mass (<-See, me clevr engineringmans!;)), and may have an interest or previous career in engineering or some sort of technical background etc, and know where and when to ignore these things based on their own artistic sensibilities. It either feels right or it doesn't. Here we see a mix of the engineer and the artist but remember you're not actually NASA, you don't need to justify your work to everyone who tries to pick it apart - do it for yourself, ultimately you can never please everyone and should never try because you will never finish anything that way.
Also remember you love to show off how clever you are with your designs, but others also like to show how clever they are in picking your design apart. If you post work here this will happen, particularly if you put a big sign on your thread saying you want that to happen, as you have done here. Reading through this thread, you seem to really want replies but in the form of approval rather than critique because you're largely ignoring the advice... Now you don't have to listen to peoples opinions here, but ignoring people in general, and particularly AFTER YOU REPEATEDLY ASKED FOR HELP will just lead to more negative replies as people become frustrated with you.
So, to get anywhere here you have to be a good communicator with a strong personality, as well as artist, engineer and technically gifted 3d modeller and diplomat.
If you want to make your work more realistic then the best way is to study real world items, and yes, there's a lot 'wrong' with your designs, this one in particular is way OTT, with too much going on but that's just my opinion at the end of the day. Checking it against a list like the one above does not guarantee a great design and really far from it... Remember the further you push toward realistic, the less fantastic it will become (see - boring) I could pick apart basically any sci-fi design based on my own opinion, and so could anyone else but that's not the point, nor will that critique necessarily lead to something better... IF you want to make something good, be your own harshest critic, don't leave it to others to do your homework for you.
I started writing this in the GD thread you started (that I've closed because your asking for modelling feedback in totally the wrong forum and duplicating whats going on in here) you asked for ratings out of 10... I would like to ask you, because you should honestly ask yourself, how do you rate your own designs - out of 10? And what do you consider to be a great design (10) and what do you consider a poor (1) design?
but before you do that, do you really want a numeric value put against your work, or others? I don't think you really do or would be prepared to do that for your own work, but just think about that - honestly, objectively for yourself and keep it to yourself.
ok, i cannot seem to change my thread title so cannot say i am no longer looking for help rather just comments on what i have now completed. it is hard to get the design somewhere where it isn't too unrealistic yet also not be quite as crap as it would be in reality(with today's technology). i suppose it is natural that when someone picks at your design you pick at their arguments. i am not happy about closing that thread(you could have just locked it or something rather than totally deleting the best thing anyone has said about this fighter!http://www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/images/smilies/Mad_anim.gif!
as far as a number rating goes i consider that in my eyes some of my stuff is 9.? but no nothing can truly be 10 as this would mean that there is no room for improvement. i suppose that i just rushed that"rate it" bit out hoping anyone who bothered to rate it would think it was good enough to be worth rating. i do not think in my opinion this qualifies as a 9 but i cannot see any way that it could be better without some huge changes.
i am amazed you posted here http://01.2.3.9/bmi/www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/images/smilies/notworthy.gif as i have seen some of your work which i would certainly rate as a 9.? (s*** they are good). do you like the design?
in future i will be setting up separate threads when i want suggestions to the ones where i am "actually working" .
thanks.
At the end of the day Spacefighter, you started a thread discussing your own work in totally the wrong forum, we're already discussing it in this thread, you don't need another, especially in the wrong forum. IF the thread was more a GENERAL DISCUSSION of how members respond with critique... I feel you've had a bit of a rough ride, but you've brought much of that on yourself. Perhaps that member will repeat some of the nice things he said, in here, some of which I'm sure is well deserved. We all need a pat on the back from time to time, i for one appreciate your tenacity and self conviction, even arrogance... an artist needs that but it must, especially for the amature attempting to build a fan-base, be tempered with objectivity.
Regarding ratings, did you listen to anything I said?;) I told you such things are a bad idea for an artist to do, that you think your work is a 9, and that some of mine is also a 9 - theres nothing wrong with that, thats your opinion - but to others it perhaps says a lot about you to people who can compare our work. Since you've decided to go there, why do you rate your work as a 9 out of 10? what do you like about your own work, and what don't you like? (and i'm talking about your own work, not mine or anyone elses)
I will change your title for you, but moving forwards i suggest you try and be more objective as it will help you to progress - I think you have a major problem with taking anyone's advice but that's not an uncommon trait;). You've only been with us a few months so I'm sure everyone will be prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt... how old are you btw?
thanks for changing the title, sorry about that other thread. is suppose i rate my work as 9.(?) (nine point something) because i like it a lot(probably because i designed it to be as i liked it) but know that it could perhaps be better. perhaps i should not be considering ratings, as for my age i do not feel like saying but it is somewhere between x and y where
x^2-10x-75=0 and y^2-12y-325=0 . i am quite new to all this though. i am working on a few other things now but would like to know what people think of this fighter, i will not be changing it though. thanks.
Spacefighter, I was able merge your threads together - so to anyone who's reading the thread, it may seem a little disjointed. I am pleased you don't seem to be disheartened, bear in mind you still have a long way to go, and like the rest of us you will have to work damn hard for every "wow" you get, esp if you're posting work outside the big established franchises. I've been posting for over 10 years, the first thread I posted got about 2 replies, since then I've been on the site header more times than i can remember. - keep up the good work, OK?
Spacefighter, I was able merge your threads together - so to anyone who's reading the thread, it may seem a little disjointed. I am pleased you don't seem to be disheartened, bear in mind you still have a long way to go, and like the rest of us you will have to work damn hard for every "wow" you get, esp if you're posting work outside the big established franchises. I've been posting for over 10 years, the first thread I posted got about 2 replies, since then I've been on the site header more times than i can remember. - keep up the good work, OK?
thanks. the first two or three threads i posted(on here) got NO replies.
thanks but i think i have finished the model now and the cockpit area on this is much wider than the arrangement shown there. on my design the controls are all on the panel infront of the pilot rather than round to his sides. depending on what it is my next model will have a cockpit arrangement more similar to this.
i have now finished the model(i did that a long time ago) but i have just imported it into blender today so a quick animation of a walkaround and maybe a few shots of landing gear deploying and missiles firing are coming up. post here if you like but please let me make this VERY CLEAR that the model is finished and i no longer want comments about what is wrong with it. thank you, videos to come soon.
if they are finished you should post them in the finished work forum if posted here they will just get critiqued on things such as lighting the frame speed of the turn around weather its glitch what you can do to improve on thos things and so forth so if your gunna be posting the finished product here be prepared for thos such things if its done go to the finished forum and psot it there.
For all that roar and bellow, there's not much of a sense of speed. Good engine sounds, but the speed is very much lacking (esp. with those rooster-tails of engine flame).
Even though you have admitted you won't change it: A sense of speed is conveyed by seeing movement in relation to known size objects. Put some trees, buildings, ground vehicles, people, etc... in the background so the viewer has a sense of acceleration and velocity. You also need to show the acceleration, you go from zero to full speed in nothing flat. Also you don't need to see the full burner on a low P climb out, maybe if it pitches back after takeoff and goes ballistic then show full burn.
Posts
a long list, some are obviously true, others require a bit more thought( and then seem pretty true still). some are the sort of things you wish were not true but know are(laws:3,11,12,13,20,21,30,32,37,40). the next thing id do i will consider as many of these as i think apply(probably all of them), law number 1 shows how crap my designs may well be(yes i have calculated how much power the engines will NEED, but not whether they would actually be able to deliver it. i have calculated the kinds of forces(due to accelerations). that the pilot will be subject to without damping but NOT how the damping should be provided.) law number 39 is a bit irrelevant for this as the craft is it's own launch vehicle but i have recycled elements(engines/switches/etc) from other designs. law 2 also exposes some of my problems here as i have designed the craft to "work" with the systems functioning correctly and not(for example) with the underside engines jammed at full power, the landing gear refusing to deploy,all the shielding failed,ion columns inoperative and severed fuel pipes to the thrusters. another point about law 2 is that so many things could go wrong,it is quite a nightmare thinking of them all, often calmed only by "well that couldn't happen". thanks for sharing that list with me. what do you think of the design?
just explaining my reasoning because so many other people weren't kidding when they commented on those features. and yes i DO know. i would like to know what you think of my other designs.
these:
churchill class
Attachment not found.
nelson class
Attachment not found.
admiral peck class mk iii
Attachment not found.
admiral peck class mk iv
Attachment not found.
falcon class
no good renders yet
hmss excalibur
no renders yet as too large a model to import into blender
mk v destroyer
no renders yet
thanks.
That said the best sci-fi designers probably just know these things instinctively, like for example how expendable stores affect centre of mass (<-See, me clevr engineringmans!;)), and may have an interest or previous career in engineering or some sort of technical background etc, and know where and when to ignore these things based on their own artistic sensibilities. It either feels right or it doesn't. Here we see a mix of the engineer and the artist but remember you're not actually NASA, you don't need to justify your work to everyone who tries to pick it apart - do it for yourself, ultimately you can never please everyone and should never try because you will never finish anything that way.
Also remember you love to show off how clever you are with your designs, but others also like to show how clever they are in picking your design apart. If you post work here this will happen, particularly if you put a big sign on your thread saying you want that to happen, as you have done here. Reading through this thread, you seem to really want replies but in the form of approval rather than critique because you're largely ignoring the advice... Now you don't have to listen to peoples opinions here, but ignoring people in general, and particularly AFTER YOU REPEATEDLY ASKED FOR HELP will just lead to more negative replies as people become frustrated with you.
So, to get anywhere here you have to be a good communicator with a strong personality, as well as artist, engineer and technically gifted 3d modeller and diplomat.
If you want to make your work more realistic then the best way is to study real world items, and yes, there's a lot 'wrong' with your designs, this one in particular is way OTT, with too much going on but that's just my opinion at the end of the day. Checking it against a list like the one above does not guarantee a great design and really far from it... Remember the further you push toward realistic, the less fantastic it will become (see - boring) I could pick apart basically any sci-fi design based on my own opinion, and so could anyone else but that's not the point, nor will that critique necessarily lead to something better... IF you want to make something good, be your own harshest critic, don't leave it to others to do your homework for you.
I started writing this in the GD thread you started (that I've closed because your asking for modelling feedback in totally the wrong forum and duplicating whats going on in here) you asked for ratings out of 10... I would like to ask you, because you should honestly ask yourself, how do you rate your own designs - out of 10? And what do you consider to be a great design (10) and what do you consider a poor (1) design?
but before you do that, do you really want a numeric value put against your work, or others? I don't think you really do or would be prepared to do that for your own work, but just think about that - honestly, objectively for yourself and keep it to yourself.
as far as a number rating goes i consider that in my eyes some of my stuff is 9.? but no nothing can truly be 10 as this would mean that there is no room for improvement. i suppose that i just rushed that"rate it" bit out hoping anyone who bothered to rate it would think it was good enough to be worth rating. i do not think in my opinion this qualifies as a 9 but i cannot see any way that it could be better without some huge changes.
i am amazed you posted here http://01.2.3.9/bmi/www.scifi-meshes.com/forums/images/smilies/notworthy.gif as i have seen some of your work which i would certainly rate as a 9.? (s*** they are good). do you like the design?
in future i will be setting up separate threads when i want suggestions to the ones where i am "actually working" .
thanks.
Regarding ratings, did you listen to anything I said?;) I told you such things are a bad idea for an artist to do, that you think your work is a 9, and that some of mine is also a 9 - theres nothing wrong with that, thats your opinion - but to others it perhaps says a lot about you to people who can compare our work. Since you've decided to go there, why do you rate your work as a 9 out of 10? what do you like about your own work, and what don't you like? (and i'm talking about your own work, not mine or anyone elses)
I will change your title for you, but moving forwards i suggest you try and be more objective as it will help you to progress - I think you have a major problem with taking anyone's advice but that's not an uncommon trait;). You've only been with us a few months so I'm sure everyone will be prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt... how old are you btw?
x^2-10x-75=0 and y^2-12y-325=0 . i am quite new to all this though. i am working on a few other things now but would like to know what people think of this fighter, i will not be changing it though. thanks.
thanks anyway.