Shipbucket

Sorry to say, this but I have no idea what's Your problem. Maybe You would be so kind to redo the Ae-45 to Your liking? (for my information, as I'm not planning to change anything, frankly speaking)

Standard I'm using is - one line of lighter shade along the upper edge (if rounded) and darker along the lower edge (if rounded) for planes with length below 20meters, and double line for those above 20meters.

I don't see how it become suddenly any different from the all other drawings in this thread.

I think what he means is that you need to shade the Ae-45 to suggest a more accurate cross-section.

Here we go again. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? If you can't grok this, what I'm trying to discourage is the current slide toward nit picking over each others drawings, as 'experts'. I have to say this, there is a section of the forum that sees itself as qualified to critique every single post; fine, but it ends up being not in the spirit of Shipbucket.

@Klagldsf - if that's what Thiel meant (which in this case would most probably mean one pixel of shading along lower edge and two pixels along upper edge), then why he didn't wrote it in normal English but "upped the shading a notch"? Not that I would be keen to do anything about that, but at least I would understand what is he talking about - actually I though that he's suggesting to make it darker. Besides, I believe that Shipbucket, including FD-scale section, uses certain stylistical conventions, not "more accurate cross-sections"... otherwise we would have to start with lots of reworking of shading/coloring of underwater hulls of many SB-scale ships...

Eswube,

That is exactly what Thiel meant, although I am certain he was not trying to mess with you in any way, some of us have a better command of the English language than others, let's remember that. For the convenience of our brother artists who do not have a grasp of finite phrases, let us adhere to the K.I.S (Keep It Simple) principle.

As to the Shading of Vehicles and Aircraft, Let's try to keep it as real as possible, yet following standards already set.

_________________
"It is better to type nothing and be assumed an ass, than to type something and remove all doubt." - Me

@Nighthunter - while it may be hard to believe, my grasp of English is actually much better in verbal communication (I noticed I'm making lots of errors during writing, because I'm starting to "think" too much - not mentioning typos). Problem is, that with idiomatic expressions, until You know that particular one, there's often very little that could help You with finding out "what the author had in mind". :/

Btw. after closer inspection of photographs of Ae-45 on Airliners, I'm inclined to say, that the cross-section of it's fuselage in the rear part (between the wings and tail - which is the only part where making difference between upper and lower edge would be workable) seems to be near-oval anyway.

Eswube,

My examination of the Ae-45 shows a more circular upper fuselage towards the cockpit, similar in angle to a B-29 (which I might add, no one has done yet, surprisingly). I would suggest that for that area, a 2 pixel shading of said aircraft in that area.

_________________
"It is better to type nothing and be assumed an ass, than to type something and remove all doubt." - Me

Updated. May need to refersh, though.
And honestly, I don't like it.

Btw. This thread is nearing to an end (and opening FD Scale Aircraft 4), isn't it?

Aye, it is getting close to the 50 Page Mark. New thread will be opened once we hit that mark though, lol.

_________________
"It is better to type nothing and be assumed an ass, than to type something and remove all doubt." - Me

Anywho, back to our regularly scheduled Programing, of a sort, lol:

_________________
"It is better to type nothing and be assumed an ass, than to type something and remove all doubt." - Me