Question about (GWX 2) recognition manual images

[Albrecht Von Hesse]

Just curious about some of the images. Almost all of them look spiffy, but a couple just look odd.

In the British section, the Kent class has a rear mast that looks white while the fore mast is the greyish that matches the rest of the vessel. The London-class' rigging is also white and looks odd. In the merchants' section the Empire-type freighter just looks, ummm . . . weird. Like the masts and rigging are fuzzy and outlined in white St. Elmo's fire. Compared to the quality of all the other merchants the Empire-type does stick out like a sore thumb.

Not criticizing, just mentioning it.

[Turm]

I noticed the same about the white fuzziness; it's unfortunate but not a major issue.

Also, some ships are shown with perspective, some without (i.e. infinite focal length). So the 20° and 45° views are a little strange for some ships, with the bow looking large and the stern looking small. Presumably taken from in-game screenshots with the standard external camera - not representative of how you see them through the scopes with high zoom (only correct if you're about 100 metres away looking at them through the obs scope with 1x zoom!). To get images without perspective, you'd need to use a 3D modelling program or draw the images freehand, I think. Not an easy task! :o

I'd rather have all the extra ships than perfect recognition manual images, though :yep: All in all I can't fault the effort that's been made.

[danlisa]

To get images without perspective, you'd need to use a 3D modelling program or draw the images freehand, I think. Not an easy task! :o

Tell me about it.:lol:

I'll fix what I can.

[Kpt. Lehmann]

To get images without perspective, you'd need to use a 3D modelling program or draw the images freehand, I think. Not an easy task! :o

Tell me about it.:lol:

I'll fix what I can.

Dan, would you mind making them pink as well?:lol:

[Albrecht Von Hesse]

I noticed the same about the white fuzziness; it's unfortunate but not a major issue.

. . . . . .

I'd rather have all the extra ships than perfect recognition manual images, though :yep: All in all I can't fault the effort that's been made.

Oh, I certainly agree!! I'm neither faulting nor am I criticizing. I just wanted to point it out in case it had slipped notice.

As to perspective issues, I work in a machine shop and have access to CADCAM software. I might be able to create perspective views if anyone is nterested.

[danlisa]

As to perspective issues, I work in a machine shop and have access to CADCAM software. I might be able to create perspective views if anyone is interested.

Thanks for the offer but I have all the software I need to make the new pages with.:up:

Just happens that some ships were 'last minute' additions which left me no time to create the manual pages for them. I knew there where pages which needed fixing but we weren't going to hold up the release waiting for them.

[Turm]

If you could fix a couple of the worst offenders, that would be excellent and much appreciated, danlisa :smug:

I thought it ended up in the current state because different people had contributed the ships and each had their own method of producing the recognition manual pages to go with them; some obviously better than others. Had no expectation of any later improvements, so this is a pleasant surprise, and will go a small way in aiding the ID of ships - there are just so many now it is considerably harder than it was in stock SH3! :rotfl:

[danlisa]

Ideally, We/I want all pages to be the same. However, at something like 2-3 hours a page and with 178 different ships, you can see how long it could take.:rotfl:

As it was, I had to make 38(ish) new pages for the additional ships added into GWX2.0.

However, no worries, I will certainly redo the pages that have perspective and redo the odd looking pages.:up: