FOK. Dr.I 425/17

[1998328is]

Tim,
Thanks for another great desktop picture. It looks awesome!
Love the paint can and the frame that shows up inside the cockpit. I'm like you I can't say that I understand all the wrangling about who killed who.. (white rudder red rudder, did he fly plane number so and so)
Historical accuracy would be really great, but it sounds like the experts can't agree and there is probably not enough information to go on anyway.
Back to your image
I'm not convinced by the guns. They seem to stand out from the rest of the image. Is it an issue with the shadows? The barrels are jumping out at me. Maybe it would look different printed. I don't know
The wingtips are terrific! Nicely formed. I don't know Maya but doing it in Carrara is painful.
Some questions
1. What color mix did you use for the red? (I have downloaded you color schemes by the way they were very helpful)
2. How much post-work do you do in photoshop?
3. I can't tell but did you fix the attachments points for the struts?
4. The ribbing on the wings.. Is it part of the model or is it done with the Map/bump?
5.Any chance of seeing one of your maps? I would really like to see how you did the last DR-1.
6. Just what is a "wife render"?
Thanks again for the image!
PA

[Tim West]

PA,
Thanks and glad to hear your comments.

You dont like the mg's? Me neither. They were rendered twice. The first pass was washed out so I did another with a new material and merged the two. Believe me they are an improvement Really should re work the material for them.

Even in Maya the wing tips were a bear. It took a few tries to get them right. I cut some curves with booleans to get the taper and radius needed and then beveled the edges at the tip. Since then I have been doing more nurbs and subD stuff and these techniques would have been easier to shape the tips than in straight polygons. Model and learn

1. What color mix did you use for the red? (I have downloaded you color schemes by the way they were very helpful)
Try a range between RGB 139,14,8 and 145,17,14. The color I feel would not have been constant across the linen.

2. How much post-work do you do in photoshop?
Lots. I used to think that less was a better approach but I have since realized that PS is yet another tool in my box. So why not use it? Besides allowing me to fix stuff, the post work lets me do some things that if rendered would just not work as intended. This is a important step in the process as far as I am concerned.

3. I can't tell but did you fix the attachments points for the struts?
Why yes I did. I am surprised anyone even noticed. They are more accurate now.

4. The ribbing on the wings.. Is it part of the model or is it done with the Map/bump?
Yes and Yes. I like to model the peak and taper out to the valley between the ribs with the bump. This cuts the amount of polys used to create the ribs and valleys. Ribbed and scalloped wings can be resource heavy at times.

5.Any chance of seeing one of your maps? I would really like to see how you did the last DR-1.
If I show you, I would have to kill you.... Ok maybe not. Here is a sample of the maps used for this model. If I was to do it over I would probably even break up my maps to smaller pieces. Each map is 2048x2048x150 and while working up the maps the files can be as large as 500 megs or more. This is just a pain to work with. The actual textures when finished are about 5 megs.


There are other maps for the guns and Le Rhone/Oberusel.

6. Just what is a "wife render"?
LOL, yeh that would be cool....like a holo-wife

[1998328is]

Thanks Tim,
These images are very interesting. It looks like Maya can use one map for the entire model? Does Maya has a UV Mapper? And if so is it hard to work with?
I'll post some of my maps when I get a chance. Carrara uses a separate map for each individual piece. I really need to try the Maya Personal Learning Edition one of these days.
What is SubD? Is that like a vertex object?
So thats a wife Render!
Regards
PA

[Tim West]

No problem,

Maya can use one or multiple textures for one object or one map for multiple objects. The image I posted is actually 3 individual maps for multiple objects on each map.

As my texture files get more complex and larger in size they are becoming a resource hog. So now I make use of smaller maps, that way if its not being rendered, its not being loaded into memory.

Unwrapping maps is pretty easy with some practice. Its pretty predictable as well and easy to tweak UV's.

SubD's or sub division modeling. It allows you to work with a less complex object and translate the work to a more complex model read hear " http://www.architecture.yale.edu/dmo...lete/SubDs.pdf " for a better idea of SubD modeling. Its great for organic shapes, but I also find useful for creating smoothed aircraft objects....like the nose panel of a DH-2.

Take care,

[glcanon]

Tim West - you are without doubt "the man" when it comes to virtual Dr.1's. And I'd guess you've probably become more familiar with certain aspects of its design than actual owners of flying Dr.1s. Can't wait to see more of your work.

Do you fly simulators? If so, have you painted/skinned a Dr.1 to suit your own taste? If you're not into sim flying, you're missing out. You can "fly" your model around, view it from any angle, at any time of the day, even under a full moon, over various terrain, environments, and weather conditions, looking for that 'perfect' shot to use as a prelim idea for one of your masterpieces.

I found this aerodrome website just recently and have been posting on another part of the forum, asking why they're painting a real Dr.1 in Toronto with that typical airshow neon red. Answer: airshow crowds (and the owner) like that bling bling color. Indeed, it does stand out, just doesn't look real to me.

It was suggested I check out this forum. One fellow asked me what color I thought 425/17 should be: so I posted a Dr.1 image taken from my MS Flight Simulator 2004 sim, parked on the grass, the same 5 o'clock pose as yours, and almost the same color as yours. Mine still has a white cowl and white wheel coverings (but only because I haven't repainted them red yet, I'm still experimenting with various reds). Yours is a tad darker, but it certainly looks "right," to me. My gut tells me you're damn close, or as close to 'spot on' as we'll ever surmise.

I'm on someone else's computer right now and don't have my references with me, but I could swear that the white border surrounding the crosses on the upper wing do not extend all the way to the trailing edge of the wing. I don't have the image of 425/17 (or 477/17) being guarded with me at this time, but I think that image will confirm whether my memory is correct. So if you are basing your design on that photo, check it out. Maybe my memory is faulty, but I could swear when I researched this issue to create my own skins for my FS9 sim Dr.1 I had to leave a little red at the trailing edge of the wings.

BTW, the starboard fuselage cross of MvR's plane was auctioned in 1994. There's a b+w image of this same piece in the book "Under the Guns of the Red Baron," but fortunately I found a color advertisement of the auction and saved it for posterity. But I sure wish I'd ordered a large glossy auction catalog. Did anyone participate in that auction, or have a catalog from that auction?

Cheers!

[glcanon]

Ok, I'm home and have found a few references. Let's again review photo #116 in Alex Imrie's book on page 80 that Tim refers to as one of his references, otherwise known as the photo of MvR's bird with the inverted-V blemish which is under guard. I have several copies of this photo, which can be made clearer by inverting them. I'll shrink one for you (see below).

Imrie seems to believe that this bird (he calls it 425/17) was taken in its "final" state of decoration.

You will note the wide crosses on the top wing surface. This is the same wide cross that the USAF Musuem opted to paint on their Dr.1 upper wing surface. Also consistant with this photo and the USAF's bird is that the white border on the upper wing crosses do not extend all the way to the trailing edge of the upper wing.

I have inverted Imrie's photo #116 so that you may compare it to the USAF's paint job. I'm not saying anything about the USAF version other than they have chosen the same wide cross as depicted in photo 116, and that the white border does not extend all the way to the trailing edge.

Additionally, if you compare the starboard fuselage cross (the black portion) in photo 116 to Tim's drawing, you will immediately notice that Tim's black cross is slightly narrower than the cross in photo 116. Now, take the photo of the port fuselage cross found in the Canadian Museum (yes, the one with the signatures covering the middle of the cross), and simply use Photoshop to extend the black part of the cross inwards so that it covers up the white area with the signatures... Voila - you will end up with a cross slightly thicker than Tim's...a cross which resembles the one in Imrie's photo #116. Now when I paste this cross onto one of my flt sim Dr.1s and park it just like in photo 116, the cross appears exactly the same the cross on photo 116, just slightly thicker than Tim's.

Unfortunately I don't own a scanner. But I also have a color photo of the starboard fuselage cross from 425/17, and it too is entirely consistant with what I am saying... that the fuselage cross is slightly thicker than Tim's. The caption from the Phillips Auction advertisement states: "Cross measures 54 x 54cm." I'm not sure if that includes the white border, perhaps not. This piece was authenticated by MvR authority Alex Imrie and sold to a private collector in 1995. You can view a b+w image of this same fuselage cross on page 161 of "Under the Guns of the Red Baron," by Norman Franks.

Something else I've found, if I may quote fm an email source, which unfortunately I cannot vouch for:

From: Gregory N Rydquist <gregrydquist@juno.com>
Dated: 7 Jul 97

"I own a small section of 425/17 I bought about 15 years ago from P.J. Carisella. The color is so dark red as to be almost marron or maroon-brown. It must have come from and undersurface area as the base coat is blue and there's a coast of varnish in there too. The red must have been a bit contaminated as there are tiny flecks of black. Or possibly soot or oil."

Now, if we believe this Rydquist bloke, then MvR's final mount was indeed painted blue on its underside before it was overpaint red, which leads one to believe 425/17 was not painted entirely red at the factory. It was as Tim also suggests, field-painted.

Alex Imrie seems to believe the same. In the same book, page 65, photo number 94, Imrie brings the inverted-V blemish bird to our attention again, and we note that this plane is solid red, including tail and undersides. Quoting Imrie's caption: "Richthofen's all-red 425/17 at Lechelle in front of the Bessoneau hangers in late March 1918 (prior to the Iron Cross national inignia being painted over). Either the red tail was painted over, or lacking evidence of that, perhaps it was replaced with another, for MvR had written a letter in April to a friend complaining that they total many aircraft on landing, often times running out of petrol and having to land in shell-pocked fields which make the triplanes irrepairable. From Imrie, "From the protective covers around the engine and the use of a canvas propeller cover, it appears that the aircraft was not in use at the time. It awaits the change to Balkenkreuze, which changes were actually made to Jasta 11 triplanes on the aerodrome when this photo was taken..." On 13 May 1918 an amendment (Kogenluft 43132 FI III) to the original 17 March Kogenluft order calls for the vertical arms of the wing crosses to extend all the way from leading edge to trailing edge - i.e., the cross had to occupy the full chord. This was after MvR's death, so it is reasonable to believe MvR's crosses did not extend the full wing chord. They, in fact, resembled the crosses on the USAF's museum Dr.1 scheme, just like photo 116.

Interestingly enough, Norman Franks states that the wing and fuselage undersurfaces of 425/17 were turquoise, but does not cite his reference or reason for believing so.

In the next photo, #95, Imrie suggest that this plane, with red nose, red wheel, turquoise underside, green fuselage and white tail, is "almost certainly 477/17."... "The rudder, which was probably previously painted red, has been over-painted white and its cross changed to meet the new requirements." BTW, the crosses in this photo are of the straight-edge type. We know the underside is blue b/c it appears lighter in color and one can see black stencilling on the underside of the top wing (which isn't possible if it was overpainted red).

[glcanon]

I've taken the liberty to slightly modify Mssr Comeau's fine drawing of the 425/17. I've changed the color a bit and modified the crosses to more closely resemble those shown in Alex Imrie's photo #116 on page 80 of his book, "The Fokker Triplane."

[Elfen]

Tim- Excellent work.
From my recollection of the various descriptions of the Baron's planes, it was Blood Red. Some books I have seen said that it was bright red, but to me, bright red would not quite work well for some reason.

Question I have to ask, other than the two tripes he had, and the 2 or 3 albatrosses he flew before then, was there any other plane that he went into battle with? I believe that he borrowed one for a while when F1.103/17 was shot down, though he was barred from flying for a while.

[Dan_San_Abbott]

Elfen:
Aircraft that are known to be flown by MvR were:
Jasta Boelcke, Alb.D.II 491/16, Alb.D.III. Jasta 11, Alb.D.III "le Petit Rouge", Halb D.II, Alb.D.III, Alb.D.III 789/17,Alb.D.V 1177/17(Red body), Alb.D.V2059/17, (red body), Fok.F.I 102/17, Alb.D.V 4693/17, Fok.DR.I 114/17#Fok.DR/I 152/17, Fok.DR.I 477/17, Fok.DR.I 127/17, Fok.DR.I 161/17*, Fok.DR.I 525/17* and Fok.DR.I 425/17.
#Crashed. * borrowed, not flown in combat.
Blue skies,
Dan-San

[Tim West]

glcanon and elfen, thanks

glcanon,
Your right about the cross fields on the top wing. In Learmans book the photo is washed near the top but in Imries , its nice and clear. Nice call

Not sure about the cross thickness. They are based on color photos sent to me and may not be exact. Probably close enough.....well for me anyhow

The main focus of the render was the color and my belief that the plane was filed painted rather than factory finished. Hopefully I have conveyed that view in a convincing manner =D

By the way, I have flown flight sims since the mid 80's and actually got my 3d start doing game mods. And your right...they are a blast