Hard Light Productions Forums

Community Projects => The FreeSpace Upgrade Project => Topic started by: Huggybaby on January 06, 2007, 10:35:06 am

Title: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 06, 2007, 10:35:06 am
Where to begin? At the beginning of course. What I want to develop is a reference gallery of pics, showing the affects of changes in the launcher. Oldbies can say "I like this effect, what happened to that effect?" Well, how many people can join that conversation? Not anybody that hasn't been following SCP for a long time, that's for sure. I want to make it everybody, even us nugs ("new useless guys" as we called them in the army.) All we need is pics and parameters. I'll start with some crappy pics and the most basic parameters. I'll make better screenshots later.

What happened was, I was running FS2 SCP, and I had cranked my ATI x700 video card settings to max. I'm talking  6x AA, 16x AF, highest quality texture settings etc. using the fantastic NGO drivers and ATI Tray Tools, but for some reason I was staying at my max 100fps rather than dropping to 15 with the big explosions. "Wow" I thought, my video card must have magically sorted itself out!  :lol:

Then I realized I was running No Mods. :p So, I switched to mediavps, STILL 100 fps! WOW, this is really cool! THEN I noticed I had NONE of the graphics flags enabled! Huggy, you dip****!

So I got to thinking, as I'm wont to do..."It's funny I can't tell when they're turned off because it looks so good anyway". And I really like a steady frame rate. But that's another topic---and oh yes, I'll get to that in another post in about an hour.

So, what exactly are the differences? And are there tradeoffs? Yes, I found something I liked better with the no mod than with the mediavps version, but that's with no flags.

This will take some time, but it will be great fun and really worthwhile when we're done---especially as you contribute your own observations. I really like documenting stuff in a definitive manner. It keeps people from having to answer the same questions over and over, so they can spend their time in more productive pursuits. So let's begin.

No flags at all:

With no mods (left), the basilisk has a nice red stripe
While the mediavps version (center) looks dull by comparison
Although a mediavps drone (right) DOES have color. Hmmm.
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07016/nomodbasilisk.jpg) (http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07016/mediavpsbasilisk.jpg) (http://xs511.xs.to/xs511/07010/mediavpshascolorthistime.jpg)

Top we see a no mods damaged ship is trailing nice evidence of damage
Center we see the fuzzy cloud-like damage trail from the mediavps version
Bottom is Bobboau's particle fix, perhaps the best of all, it's very red and sparky looking
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07010/stockparticles.jpg)
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07010/mediavpsmoke.jpg)
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07010/BobboauparticlefixX2.jpg)
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Gregster2k on January 06, 2007, 11:19:05 am
 :wtf: I assure you, the Basilisk is definitely supposed to be red even with MVPs. >_>

However, as for the damage trails, I have to agree on that one...a mix between the two would be preferable. Although be prepared for the scientific types here to jump on here claiming that the new one is superior because it's "venting oxygen" or something...
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: CP5670 on January 06, 2007, 11:28:40 am
For the first image, you need to turn on the glowmaps flag (-glow). It doesn't look like you have specular mapping (-shine) on either. Those flags along with -jpgtga are pretty much the bare minimum that should be turned on with the media VPs, and environmental mapping (-env) is in most cases a good idea too.

That being said, there are a few cases where the media VP content looks much worse than the retail versions, particularly some of the weapon shots. I have brought this up repeatedly in this past, but I don't know if it has been addressed yet. It's pretty easy to revert to the originals though, by replacing the tbm file with one that has the weapon images removed (the Maxim and Circe are the main culprits, but there are also a few others).
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 06, 2007, 11:32:42 am
Quote
I assure you, the Basilisk is definitely supposed to be red even with MVPs
Thanks, that's what I need to determine. I'm pretty sure the Basilisk will get color back once I turn on one of the flags, this is just the baseline. I want to document all the ins and outs, what needs to be on, what not, etc.
It's probably impractical to document every permutation of the graphics flags, but I felt like I needed to start somewhere.

Quote
However, as for the damage trails, I have to agree on that one...a mix between the two would be preferable. Although be prepared for the scientific types here to jump on here claiming that the new one is superior because it's "venting oxygen" or something...
Alright, I didn't get flamed from the jump, thanks CP5670!
I remember my first "Oh wow!" moment. I was playing Wing Commander. My ship had taken damage in a fight. In the flyby animation between nav points, I saw that sparks were coming out of my ship. And it happened to my wingman too. That was cool! Those sparks did NOT look like escaping oxygen. Screw scientific realism, explosion sounds don't happen in a vacuum, nor do gasoline fireballs. FS may be the LEAST realistic of all space sims!  :lol:
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Bobboau on January 06, 2007, 12:25:40 pm
geese, that is lame.
try these

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 06, 2007, 01:36:49 pm
CP5670 (Reply #2) I cross posted you and completely missed your reply.
Quote
For the first image, you need to turn on the glowmaps flag (-glow). It doesn't look like you have specular mapping (-shine) on either. Those flags along with -jpgtga are pretty much the bare minimum that should be turned on with the media VPs, and environmental mapping (-env) is in most cases a good idea too.

You're correct, I had NOTHING turned on. I'm trying to get pics of what each flag does, and I'll see if I can get shots of the flag combo you suggest.
When you say "the bare minimum that should be turned on with the media VPs", that's what I'm looking for, though I guess that overlaps with my other performance/quality topic. I don't know if I'll be able to keep the two separate.

Bobboau, your zip contains three excitement inducing ani's. Please remember I know nothing.
Where should your ani's be placed and what should I expect to see compared to what I have now?

And since I had no graphics flags turned on in my pics, will your ani's work without any flags, and if not, what do I need to turn on to activate them?

And will these be included in the upcoming 3.6.9 mediavp's?

I'm not sure you guys realize how advanced you are! I'm trying to bridge the gap between the programmers and the absolute know-nothings, the goal being maximum eye candy that can be scaled back as necessary depending on system performance.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: aRaven on January 06, 2007, 03:42:27 pm
if i stand correct the anis should go into the data/effects folder
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 07, 2007, 01:37:22 pm
Thanks aRaven, I'll try that and if it makes a difference I'll take a screenshot.

Been busy so slow on the shots, plus I really need to place them side by side and I'm not sure how to do that in a bbs post---hmm, I think I can use tables.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: DaBrain on January 07, 2007, 02:28:47 pm
And will these be included in the upcoming 3.6.9 mediavp's?

No, they won't. The effect is supposed to like fire. Also the particles shouldn't use ANIs, cause ANI particles are known to cause slow-downs when you get close to them.


I'll try to create something more firy looking.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 07, 2007, 02:43:16 pm
Does that mean you will quit using ani's?

I changed to tables. And to get better shots, I just flew closer LOL
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: DaBrain on January 07, 2007, 02:49:37 pm
Yes, I've converted all ANIs that might matter in this case to EFF.

Hopefully, the framerates will be more constant now.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 07, 2007, 02:58:04 pm
Awesome, when you provide the link, PLEASE tell me how to install them.

And are EFF's and DDS's the same thing?
<edit> The link to the mod starter pack in your sig is broken.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on January 07, 2007, 03:11:29 pm
No.

DDS is a file type, like BMP, JPG, TGA and the like.

ANI is an animation file that contains frames in PCX format.

EFF is an animation system used only Freespace Open, as far as I know.

An EFF file is a plain text file that only contains a few lines of text that specify the frame rate of the animation, number of frames, and the file type of the frames. EFF animation can use practically any image type that FSOpen uses, but DDS is mostly used these days because it has excellent quality/size ratio and it also contains mipmaps in layers, so it speeds up mipmapping process too (which naturally enhances performance).

For example, if you want to make an EFF animation that has frame rate of 24 fps and uses, say, 48 frames, you do it like this.

Filename.eff:
$Type: DDS  #announces the filetype used in the individual frames
$Frames: 48 #number of individual frames
$FPS: 24  #frame rate

Now, you place this file in appropriate folder along with all the individual frames named as

filename_01.DDS, filename_02.DDS etc. etc.

And when you specify an effect to use the texture "filename", the EFF system uses the frames as animation.

The advantages to ANI's are obvious, because the animations are no more limited by PCX file type's rather severe limitations. All hail DDS files! :D
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Turey on January 07, 2007, 03:18:16 pm
<edit> The link to the mod starter pack in your sig is broken.

try this (http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,30703.0.html).

To convert the old Gamespy links into HLP links, do this:
1. Look at the Gamespy link. It should be something like
http://dynamic4.gamespy.com/~freespace/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=XXX
2. See the XXX? Take the number that is there and put it into the following link at the XXX:
http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,XXX.0.html
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 07, 2007, 03:56:10 pm
Neat, thanks for the scoop Herra Tohtori, that clears up a lot. When you say "place this file in appropriate folder", which folder might that be?

Thanks for the link turey.

I added a pic. I documented that using mediavps, drones are colorful while the Basilisk is not. From reading I know that not all models have been "converted", but I'm not sure what they need to be converted to or whether this has anything to do with it, or if I made a mistake somewhere.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on January 07, 2007, 04:00:32 pm
Neat, thanks for the scoop Herra Tohtori, that clears up a lot. When you say "place this file in appropriate folder", which folder might that be?

That's case-specific. Effects go to ..\FREESPACE2\<mod>\data\effects, animated ship textures go to ..\FREESPACE2\<mod>\data\maps as far as I know, but I have only meddled with effects files myself (particularly, beam textures).

Easiest way is (if you're replacing some old ANI file with new animation) to look where the old ANI file is, and put the new EFF ani and the frame files in corresponding directory.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 07, 2007, 04:03:51 pm
Thanks. I hope that anybody who posts such effects files will specify the path as a matter of course, but it seems too often to be taken for granted.
<edit> I noticed Bobboau's effects don't work when mediavps is selected, a priority issue.
And now I can't find which mission I was using to take pics of the Basilisk.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Bobboau on January 10, 2007, 11:23:22 am
those effects predate eff code, I've had them for a VERY long time, that is why they are not effs. I like them better than a 'fire' 'smoke' effect, not because those effects are less realistic (wich incedently they are) but because I think they look cooler. but that is my oppionion and it could be wrong.

and yeah, effs get priority over ani, so any ani in a vp will overide and ani of the same name.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 10, 2007, 05:00:47 pm
OK, so how do I make your cool effects work AND use mediavps at the same time? Do I need to use vpview, or can I put them in some particular folder?
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on January 10, 2007, 05:32:03 pm
Extract the frames from the ani's and make an EFF file out of them. :nervous:


It might also be possible to override the EFF animations with some multimod setup, but I would simply extract the ANI file to individual frames, throw the frame files into mediavps/data/effects and write an EFF file. That will definitely take care of overriding issues. Just takes some work...
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: taylor on January 10, 2007, 07:01:10 pm
I converted Bob's ANIs into EFFs (I too like them better than the current effects), but I've been making changes to them to adjust the coloring a bit.  They are a bit too red for my tastes, and before I roll them into my own VP set I'd like to correct that.

After I'm done with them (perhaps tomorrow) I'll post a VP of the new files if anyone wants them.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on January 10, 2007, 09:17:53 pm
Thank you, I want them!

In fact, I'd like a whole collection of options, as long as I'm told where to put them to make them work. Especially since my fireball.tbl tweak idea was shot down.

I'll bet I'm not alone either.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: aRaven on January 11, 2007, 09:29:17 am
yeah, i'd like to have them too ^^
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Slime on February 07, 2007, 04:35:49 am
So.... is there a place I can get the VP? I've seen people mentioning these effects many times, but they still elude me!
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: MetalDestroyer on February 07, 2007, 04:55:27 am
Dude, I have to try the particle effect, I like it !
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: ARSPR on February 07, 2007, 10:08:42 am
One question that has rised testing the new vp effects? Where are the particle effects defined? I mean which table sets the use of particleexp01, particlesmoke01 and particlesmoke02?

Or is their use hardcoded?

Thanks a lot in advance.

I converted Bob's ANIs into EFFs (I too like them better than the current effects), but I've been making changes to them to adjust the coloring a bit.  They are a bit too red for my tastes, and before I roll them into my own VP set I'd like to correct that.

After I'm done with them (perhaps tomorrow) I'll post a VP of the new files if anyone wants them.

Please, post it ASAP or give DaBrain a copy.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: taylor on February 07, 2007, 12:12:23 pm
One question that has rised testing the new vp effects? Where are the particle effects defined? I mean which table sets the use of particleexp01, particlesmoke01 and particlesmoke02?
particleexp01, particlesmoke01 and particlesmoke02 are hardcoded.  Any other particles are defined in other tables (such as the $Pspew stuff in weapons.tbl).

I converted Bob's ANIs into EFFs (I too like them better than the current effects), but I've been making changes to them to adjust the coloring a bit.  They are a bit too red for my tastes, and before I roll them into my own VP set I'd like to correct that.

After I'm done with them (perhaps tomorrow) I'll post a VP of the new files if anyone wants them.

Please, post it ASAP or give DaBrain a copy.
I did forget that didn't I. :)

Ok, here is what I'm using now: http://www.game-warden.com/~taylor/unofficial/newpart.rar

The particlesmoke ones are slightly modified color wise from Bobboau's, and the particleexp01 is actually an old one I've used for a couple of years, since I didn't like his.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Slime on February 08, 2007, 11:14:38 am
The new particles are magnificient, but what's the easiest way to make them override the media VPs? The workaround I'm using is shoving the newpart.vp into my mod folders, which is hardly the most convenient way to do it. Simply placing it with the rest of the VPs doesn't work.

Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: neoterran on February 08, 2007, 11:20:49 am
One question that has rised testing the new vp effects? Where are the particle effects defined? I mean which table sets the use of particleexp01, particlesmoke01 and particlesmoke02?
particleexp01, particlesmoke01 and particlesmoke02 are hardcoded.  Any other particles are defined in other tables (such as the $Pspew stuff in weapons.tbl).

I converted Bob's ANIs into EFFs (I too like them better than the current effects), but I've been making changes to them to adjust the coloring a bit.  They are a bit too red for my tastes, and before I roll them into my own VP set I'd like to correct that.

After I'm done with them (perhaps tomorrow) I'll post a VP of the new files if anyone wants them.

Please, post it ASAP or give DaBrain a copy.
I did forget that didn't I. :)

Ok, here is what I'm using now: http://www.game-warden.com/~taylor/unofficial/newpart.rar

The particlesmoke ones are slightly modified color wise from Bobboau's, and the particleexp01 is actually an old one I've used for a couple of years, since I didn't like his.

I can certify these look great.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: neoterran on February 08, 2007, 11:22:05 am
The new particles are magnificient, but what's the easiest way to make them override the media VPs? The workaround I'm using is shoving the newpart.vp into my mod folders, which is hardly the most convenient way to do it. Simply placing it with the rest of the VPs doesn't work.



rename the vp file like this a_newpart.vp. If you do this, the order of the file will be loaded first, otherwise they get loaded later (n after m, get it?) and they don't work.

I do this for all additional vps added to the mediavps folder for consistency.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Slime on February 08, 2007, 02:07:39 pm
Ah, the power of the alphabet... Thanks for the tip.

By the way, does anyone have a way to use the new thruster glows (particularly shivan ones) without disabling jpg/tga textures? From what I've seen, the "official" take on the matter will not happen prior to the next MVPs, naturally. Simply put, are the glows available in another format (I don't remember what was the best file type concernig the image load order..)?

Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: aRaven on February 09, 2007, 11:19:26 am
where can you get the new shivan glows?
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Slime on February 09, 2007, 04:45:03 pm
They're in the Media VPs, but they are overriden by jpg/tga tag because of the image loading order.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 10, 2007, 03:37:46 am
Top we see a no mods damaged ship is trailing nice evidence of damage
Center we see the fuzzy cloud-like damage trail from the mediavps version
Bottom is Bobboau's particle fix, perhaps the best of all, it's very red and sparky looking
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07010/stockparticles.jpg)
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07010/mediavpsmoke.jpg)
(http://xs411.xs.to/xs411/07010/BobboauparticlefixX2.jpg)
...What about effects like in the FS1 Intro MVE?   ;7 I think they are very nice... wish I could have them.  I think a combo of FS1 Intro MVE & the new "cloudy" effect would be nice.  I'll see if I can post a screenie later.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: taylor on February 10, 2007, 04:54:10 am
...What about effects like in the FS1 Intro MVE?
Up until I switched to Bobboau's effects, that's pretty much what I used.  Lightspeed had made something close to that for me to test new blending techniques with back in 2004.  I never could get it working properly at the time, but DaBrain also made something similar when he brought up the idea of working on the new blending mode again.  As I worked on the code for the effect, I was using Lightspeed's texture to test the changes.

Unfortunately the particle code still sucks too bad to get the blending done properly, so I have never posted that effect. 
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 10, 2007, 08:35:56 am
EDIT: Darn!  Does anyone know how to use ImageShack with HLP?  [{img}][{/img}] isn't working ...
EDIT2: Fixed now.   Thank-you very much Herra Tohtori   :yes:  you-the-man!  :nod:  (It turns out that when I thought I was uploading, I was actually updating my user picture, which uploads pictures in thumbnail format for your user pic... not very good for what I wanted!)
EDIT3: @TrashMan: Correct instructions, but I was using the wrong upload (user pic instead of normal upload).  Thanks anyways.  :)

Ah, yes, the screenies...
(http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/5216/apollorearsmokeplumeclorx4.th.jpg) (http://img251.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearsmokeplumeclorx4.jpg)
(http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/364/apollorearsmokeplumeclogc0.th.jpg) (http://img122.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearsmokeplumeclogc0.jpg)
(http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/7479/apollorear2ndviewzt0.th.jpg) (http://img46.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorear2ndviewzt0.jpg)
(http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/2356/apollorear1stviewrw1.th.jpg) (http://img164.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorear1stviewrw1.jpg)
(http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/462/apolloflyby1zs3.th.jpg) (http://img161.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apolloflyby1zs3.jpg)
(http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/3140/apolloflyby2qu4.th.jpg) (http://img46.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apolloflyby2qu4.jpg)
(http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/8219/apolloflyby3ns1.th.jpg) (http://img161.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apolloflyby3ns1.jpg)
(http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/4010/apollorearlucybackdrop1zz3.th.jpg) (http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearlucybackdrop1zz3.jpg)
(http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/9638/apollorearlucybackdrop2om4.th.jpg) (http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearlucybackdrop2om4.jpg)
(http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/5176/apollobeingshot1bb2.th.jpg) (http://img115.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollobeingshot1bb2.jpg)
(http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/5811/apollobeingshot2wh9.th.jpg) (http://img107.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollobeingshot2wh9.jpg)
(http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/1959/apollobeingshot3qi5.th.jpg) (http://img251.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollobeingshot3qi5.jpg)
(http://img162.imageshack.us/img162/5118/apollobeingshot4nk1.th.jpg) (http://img162.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollobeingshot4nk1.jpg)
(http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/5139/apollojustbeforeexplodidx0.th.jpg) (http://img115.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollojustbeforeexplodidx0.jpg)
(http://img113.imageshack.us/img113/7037/apolloexploding1aq6.th.jpg) (http://img113.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apolloexploding1aq6.jpg)
(http://img254.imageshack.us/img254/9627/apolloexploding2electrija8.th.jpg) (http://img254.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apolloexploding2electrija8.jpg)

Also interesting to note:
Apollo-Lucifer size comparison:
(http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/549/apollolucysizecomparisosy8.th.jpg) (http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollolucysizecomparisosy8.jpg)

The structure of the Apollo:
(http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/6049/apollostructure2xw1.th.jpg) (http://img505.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollostructure2xw1.jpg)
(http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/5808/apollostructure1it4.th.jpg) (http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollostructure1it4.jpg)

The Manticore's glow:
(http://img128.imageshack.us/img128/2985/sfscorpionglowiessd7.th.jpg) (http://img128.imageshack.us/my.php?image=sfscorpionglowiessd7.jpg)


Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: TrashMan on February 10, 2007, 05:06:35 pm
Just copy-paste the thumbnail code you get when you upload a pic.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 11, 2007, 03:29:26 am
Tried that..

EDIT: testing temporarily to try and figure this out, please wait...  :rolleyes:
EDIT2: fixed now, see above, PS the correct code format is:
Correct code format:
Code: [Select]
[URL=http://img253.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollolucysizecomparisosy8.jpg][IMG]http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/549/apollolucysizecomparisosy8.th.jpg[/img][/URL]

nvm all this below:

These are the different code schemes I've tried, none work, the bottom two are the way ImageShack instructs.

Code: [Select]
[img]http://profile.imageshack.us/user/jr2/images/detail/#182/apollorearsmokeplumecloxp9.jpg[/img]

[url=http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearsmokeplumecloxp9.jpg][img]http://imageshack.us/thumbnmail.png[/img][/url]

[url=http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearsmokeplumecloxp9.jpg][img=http://imageshack.us/thumbnmail.png][/url]

I even tried code for e-mail:
Code: [Select]
http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearsmokeplumecloxp9.jpg
and webpages:
Code: [Select]
<a href="http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=apollorearsmokeplumecloxp9.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://imageshack.us/thumbnmail.png" border="0"/></a>
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on February 11, 2007, 12:27:15 pm
You have to use thumbnails like this to get them to work:

{url=<actual picture's URL>}{img}<thumbnail's URL>{/img}{/url}

piece of code. And replace the braces with square brackets, obviously.

The ImageShack version with img=<url> stuff doesn't work, you'll have to use the "thumbnail for forums 2" option, at least I think it was number two... :nervous:
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 11, 2007, 02:37:25 pm
PS @Herra Tohtori:
{code}{/code}
= better than
Code: [Select]
[code][/code]
Hopefully that can help for later.. :) TY again.

PS maybe not... I stuck my foot in, I did!  :lol: I need to go get some sleep...
laterzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...... ......
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Dysko on February 12, 2007, 07:42:24 am
The Scorpion's glow:
Those are Manticores :)
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 12, 2007, 08:53:02 am
I knew I should have looked them up... ok, fixed now.
EDIT: Anyways, what are the chances of getting effects like that in-game?  The explosions look sort of the same, but they are very blocky comparatively.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: neoterran on February 12, 2007, 10:37:16 am
There's no smoke in space, let's not implement that.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on February 12, 2007, 11:34:18 am
Why wouldn't there be smoke in space? :nervous:

If a spaceship is on fire and spewing atmosphere and flames and who knows what, damn sure there'll be some smoke too. The only thing is that it wouldn't be trailing the ship, it would follow it and expand spherically from the ship, provided that the ship isn't accelerating.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: neoterran on February 12, 2007, 11:35:43 am
because smoke requires things to burn and things don't burn in space, becasue there is no oxygen. So you would see red sparky particles or red embers from damaged stuff, but definately no flames like in the video and no smoke.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: NGTM-1R on February 12, 2007, 11:40:37 am
Leaking atmosphere was mentioned I think. 'sides, I kinda liked Freelancer's damage effects for caps.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on February 12, 2007, 11:51:44 am
A flame consists of a bunch of glowing combustion particles. And when those particles stop glowing they become smoke.

So, in the first place, a flame doesn't need fire to exist. A flow of hot glowing gas is sufficient to look like a flame. There's bound to be some pretty hot stoff in a FreeSpace fighter craft so I wouldn't wonder that if something technical is pierced, glowy stuff leaks out.

Not to mention that there's bound to be oxygen tanks in a space ship, also in FS fighters unless the FS tech uses transmutators to change bunch of protons, neutrons and electrons into oxygen on the fly... Which I doubt. So, a combustion-based explosion is also a possibility.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Taristin on February 12, 2007, 11:58:45 am
My word, can not a single thread exist where there's an explosion in space without someone saying that there shouldn't be fire?!
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Mongoose on February 12, 2007, 04:28:27 pm
Exactly.  As my freshman-year physics professor said, "What fun are space fights without huge explosions?"
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Huggybaby on February 12, 2007, 04:37:14 pm
As long as oxygen is in the vented gases, why wouldn't it burn anyway?
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: MP-Ryan on February 12, 2007, 05:33:10 pm
As long as oxygen is in the vented gases, why wouldn't it burn anyway?

If it was ignited before it was exposed to the vacuum, it would - briefly.

What people forget about space is its a vacuum - which means gases will not only diffuse apart, they'll actually be pulled apart by molecular motion (not in the sense of atoms being split, but oxygen gas would diffuse so rapidly that there wouldn't be enough present to allow oxidation and combustion to occur.

The argument for no smoke/flame in space is not because they don't occur, but rather because they disappear so rapidly.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Taristin on February 12, 2007, 11:02:29 pm
But that looks boooorrrriiiinggg!
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Herra Tohtori on February 12, 2007, 11:32:25 pm
The argument for no smoke/flame in space is not because they don't occur, but rather because they disappear so rapidly.


Ah, but you must consider the fact that since the gas leaks obviously exist in retail FS2, it's easily explained by increasing the volume of escaping glowing gas so that it produces the effects that we see.

I'm sure it's one form of anthropic principle... Because the flames are there (and have to be for graphics to look prettier), the amount of leaking gas must be sufficient to produce the flames. ;7 Just like because there's life in universe (I apparently even intelligent, though reports remain unconfirmed), it means that the values that define the reality (physical constants) must have certain values. It's the easiest way to avoid problems with extremely unrealistic things such as flames in space, huge explosions, almost complete disappearances of miles long spaceships upon mentioned explosions leaving only few spacehunks floating around, huge blue vortices leaving to subspace, universes popping out of nothingness to produce all that into your computer screen... Thinks like that are most easily explained by strong anthropic principle.

The more difficult explanations involve much more headache.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: fsi.scsi on February 12, 2007, 11:42:23 pm
Ever seen footage from the Apollo 13 capsule - when they had an oxygen leak? Gas was diffusing pretty rapidly (and visibly) from the service module.  Or Stage 3 of the lunar rockets being jettisoned - you can briefly see a ring of fire around the spent lower stage. 

It's the same way when you light a match, then seal it in a vacuum - it will burn as long as there is an oxygen supply.  Plain combustion is pretty boring, though. 
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 13, 2007, 01:52:16 am
Ever seen footage from the Apollo 13 capsule - when they had an oxygen leak? Gas was diffusing pretty rapidly (and visibly) from the service module.  Or Stage 3 of the lunar rockets being jettisoned - you can briefly see a ring of fire around the spent lower stage. 

It's the same way when you light a match, then seal it in a vacuum - it will burn as long as there is an oxygen supply.  Plain combustion is pretty boring, though. 
...darn, you beat me to the punch.  :p
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: CaptJosh on February 13, 2007, 02:30:18 am
Not seal it in a vacuum, seal it in a container. It will burn until it smothers itself in combustion byproduct. It's not quite the same as in space where the fuel simply dissipates.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 13, 2007, 07:47:20 am
...Right, but you have a continual source of fuel + O2: your ship.  The fire would actually be burning in your ship, spewing into the void.  Also, as mentioned above, you can see it when stuff is leaking from your ship; it's not a very good sign...

Quote from: Apollo 13 crew
Houston, we have a problem...
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: neoterran on February 13, 2007, 08:06:16 am
regardless of the above. it would not look like it does in all space movies where the flames are essentially earthbound analogues.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 13, 2007, 08:49:45 am
...which movies have flames burning on the outside of a ship, resembling flames on Earth?  Flames on the inside, of course, would be the same except for gravity's lack of effect.  (Unless artificial gravity is in use.)
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: neoterran on February 13, 2007, 09:25:11 am
...which movies have flames burning on the outside of a ship, resembling flames on Earth?  Flames on the inside, of course, would be the same except for gravity's lack of effect.  (Unless artificial gravity is in use.)

The freespace cutscenes in this very thread, and the battlestar galactica scenes (new series)
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: Slime on February 13, 2007, 10:14:15 am
It's nice to have a realistic point of view, but we've had some (quite a bit IMHO..) of this in the Explosions thread already...
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 13, 2007, 05:36:23 pm
...which movies have flames burning on the outside of a ship, resembling flames on Earth?  Flames on the inside, of course, would be the same except for gravity's lack of effect.  (Unless artificial gravity is in use.)

The freespace cutscenes in this very thread, and the battlestar galactica scenes (new series)
Eh, half of the "flames" you refer to might actually be short-circuits overheating the frame in different places...  plus, whatever rocket fuel they use, if it's leaking, and oxygen is leaking too, (or if it's built into the fuel), then it will burn.  All it needs is one of those nice sparks that you noticed flashing along the hull to light it up.  The flames stream away towards the back of the ship because it's moving forwards away from them... but I'll have to take another closer look at that cutscene...
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: CaptJosh on February 15, 2007, 08:38:39 am
Also remember that not every fuel requires O2 as an oxidizer. Ever hear of hypergolic fuels? They're binary substances that when mixed ignite and burn on their own. No molecular oxygen required. This makes them very difficult to handle because while the two substances are relatively inert alone, extreme care must be taken to avoid havivng them come into contact until in the combustion chamber of whatever engine they power.
Title: Re: We make it pretty, eh? Show me!
Post by: jr2 on February 15, 2007, 08:47:29 am
@neoterran, you have watched the FS1 cutscene intro video, right?