[Commander Zane]

Doesn't the retail texture have one blue light on the wingtips?

[Yuzuki5749]

Oh, the primaries aren't completely mapped?
I haven't noticed that...

[Hades]

Yeah but there's a lot of stretching on the texture so I don't find those faces having being mapped to the same part of the texture inconceivable, Zane, or the mapping being 'moved up' the ship or even a minor texture edit.

EDIT: Looking at the texture, it looks like it may have indeed been a minor texture edit.

[Yuzuki5749]

Hmm, ok.
I'll wait till it's fixed.

[Yuzuki5749]

The Perseus:

Please, don't wonder if some details can't be shown 

[T-LoW]

Hm, the Ulysses seems pretty shiny already when bloom is activated. Doesn't that shiny-texture + bloom totally blow the effect out?

[Kolgena]

Ulysses? What are you talking about?

That Perseus is too glossy for my taste. IMO, the original shine texture gave it the perfect brushed metal look. If you haven't picked light settings yet, I highly recommend that you at least use the MVP recommended settings. I don't think anyone here actually uses the engine defaults, which frankly, look pretty terrible, and are not suitable to use when comparing ship shininess.

(Since you're on shine textures, would you care to take a peak at the Hatchepsut? I remember a number of people complaining that it was TOO shiny. I know you are upping the shine on stuff, but it should be as easy to adjust down as it is to adjust up, right? You should only feel compelled to do so if you also feel that the Hatchepsut is too shiny for its own good.)

[Mongoose]

I don't think anyone here actually uses the engine defaults, which frankly, look pretty terrible, and are not suitable to use when comparing ship shininess.

[Yuzuki5749]

(Since you're on shine textures, would you care to take a peak at the Hatchepsut? I remember a number of people complaining that it was TOO shiny. I know you are upping the shine on stuff, but it should be as easy to adjust down as it is to adjust up, right? You should only feel compelled to do so if you also feel that the Hatchepsut is too shiny for its own good.)

The Hatshepsut is really too shiny...
I hope this one isn't doo dark...:

[Droid803]

I approve of the darkened Hattie textures.
I highly disapprove of all the more shiny versions. Things need MORE GRIMDARK GRIME and ****, the dirtier the better. This isn't HOT RODS IN SPACE. This is a GRITTY WAR STORY. I want my stuff coated in sixteen different layers of space dirt. Stop wrapping my fighters with cellophane.

You complain that the originals don't look "metal" and look "plastic".
I assert the opposite!

Your Hattie is good though.

[Ulala]

/lurk

Your 2nd attempt at the Artemis is excellent with the differentiation in shine between the paint and non-paint portions. I, too, think it could stand to be a little less shiny still, but you're doing some fantastic work here. Please keep it up!

[T-LoW]

Ulysses? What are you talking about?

The Ulysses:

Maybe I'm wrong with my thoughts and bloom is there already activated.

The bronze look of the Hattie's pretty cool though

[Flaser]

Are you also playing around with the color of the shine-map? One of the coolest, thought oft unused features of FSO is that you can give an object a different colored shine than the diffuse map.

...like this?
I've done this month before.

Yeah, exactly like that.
Giving the surface just a tad different specular sheen seems like a good technique to show off that this is metal with a coat of protective varnish, not just a shiny paint job. It's visually also more interesting than just a shiny surface.

BTW do you add some noise/patterns to your shinemaps different from the diffuse map? The new Hattie makes me think so, but I thought I'd just make sure.

[Yuzuki5749]

BTW do you add some noise/patterns to your shinemaps different from the diffuse map? The new Hattie makes me think so, but I thought I'd just make sure.

No I haven't add noise to the shinemap, but there were noises on the original-map (MVP 3.6.12) which I've editted.
They weren't visible because of the higher shine-level of the original (which have been editted, too ).

[Kolgena]

The hattie looks much better. (May I ask why you're using the old version with the broken glow maps? I think Zacam (?) released a fix some time ago, to turn the window spotlights from yellow splotches of glow paint back into baked lighting. It's not like using that version is bad for the shine map of course; I'm just curious)

 I have to echo other people's views on the other shiny ships though. If you picked an amount of shininess between what you have now and what was there before for the artemises, that would be fantastic. I personally don't like the changes to the perseus and ulysses though.

@T-LoW: Derp, sorry. I somehow missed that on the previous page >.<

[Darklord42]

I am of the opinion that if we are to bother with a shine-map then make it obvious.  Subtlety on fighters does no one any good, as no one will see it.  Only in a thread such as this will people stop and nitpik about, "would a grungy material reflect light." In game, I doubt people would have cared so much.  There is something to be said for the menacing look of sunlight glinting on an incoming fighter, although not stealthy it looks cool! All i see is that each one of these after shots is an improvement to the overall image.

[Kolgena]

Well, it's not like the current shine maps aren't doing any good. Have you tried going into the ship lab and turning off shine maps to see what things look like?

Besides, if you like super shiny, use the light flags to do that. Double all your -spec_static etc and up your contrast in post-processing, and your sunlight/lights will really start glinting. It makes more sense to get all the shine maps consistent with each other, so that playing around with the light flags won't result in one ship looking perfect, another looking matte, and another looking like it's made of pure silver.

(And welcome to HLP, where everyone loves nitpicking about the tiniest details--though this is probably why HLP makes some of the best mod material out there.)

[Yuzuki5749]

/lurk

Your 2nd attempt at the Artemis is excellent with the differentiation in shine between the paint and non-paint portions. I, too, think it could stand to be a little less shiny still, but you're doing some fantastic work here. Please keep it up!

Is one of them better?

[Zacam]

Try running the game with -shine and -env turned off and then tell me that it's "too subtle" or "makes no point" because they do.

The biggest issue is consistency and aesthetic. And not all -shine/-env alterations are going to look well on all custom lighting settings.

Every -shine/-env needs to pass a minimum of (in my opinion) only 2 light settings: Default Engine settings, and the Recommended Settings. Anything else, starts verging into the category of too many cooks for a single pot for too many plates.

I'm all for adapting enhancements, but some of these seem like they might be a bit much to me. But I'd say keep going with them and those that like them will undoubtedly use them.

[Yuzuki5749]

Well, it's not like the current shine maps aren't doing any good. Have you tried going into the ship lab and turning off shine maps to see what things look like?

I already tried that (and some light-settings, too (what you've recommed )

(And welcome to HLP, where everyone loves nitpicking about the tiniest details--though this is probably why HLP makes some of the best mod material out there.)

Thanks. HLP is doing great work in improving Freespace (2)