hello,
@ Trevally:
why don't you use all the files that i uploaded ? use the camera and the aobf scales that you will find in there and enter the mission .these files are working just perfect(they are checked)...and containes allready the proper scales for the aobf. did you test them and didn't work on your pc?
note : for installation : ONLY the core files of TDW's gui v6.3.0 and on top of it the mini mod that i upload. resolution...1280x960
although it is good your 'aproach' to try to adjust your scales by setting a ship(that you know its deadly length and mast values) to a given distance and rely only on your tool (aobf tool) ,...i wouldn't suggest you to go that way.becuase,firstly,at sh5, you can't have a deadly measurment of the true distance (you say 1000m but is it exactly 1000m ? you can't say....).secondly,the tool itself is not deadly accurate so the best way is to adjust the scales as i told you.
how ? pay a close look to the pic i posted...you see how i did it ? create a fully transparent image for the ''Periscope_Mask_1024_SH5''.this will allow you to see the sh5's hardcore scales .at minimum zoom level these scales are showing you the degrees . these scales is the most important part becuase they are changing as you are changing the angular angles in cameras(logical).this mean that for each camera setting, you have to create its own specific scales for the tool .in other words ...cameras and scales for the tool goes together !now , create the fully transparent ''Periscope_Mask_1024_SH5'' and once you have decide the camera settings(angular angles,viewports and zoom levels) enter the game in order to be able to see the sh5's hardcore degree scales .the only thing that remains to do is to create your own scale for the tool that way so your '10' to match with 5,71 degrees and you are just finished the job !
@ToniloCoyote:
How exactly did you managed to get acess in .sim files ? yes , as i told you , you are absolutely correct with the procedure (mastheight) = (total height of model ship) - (draft from .sim) . i found the 47,82 with the photo 'trick' i described to an earlier post but as you managed to get the draft value from .sim i would say that your 47.92 is the deadly accurate one ( this 'difference' 47,82 or 47,92 has to do with the fact that i was counting pixels and you can't be deadly accurate with pixels)
@Magnum : there is no chance ! For many many reasons that is off topic to start listing here ( at sh3 forum...i posted these days my stands for sh5)
bye
|