Hawker Fury biplane

Unseen

Very nice model, this Hawker fury:

https://www.daz3d.com/biplane-hawker-fury

Here is what says the description:

Immerse yourself in the fascinating era of historic aviation with the Hawker Fury, a legendary biplane, with high-resolution 4K textures.

This jewel of aeronautical history will allow you to create realistic scenes of aerial battles or daily life in a new and immersive way.

With its three distinct textures representing the American, French, and German colors, the Hawker Fury offers you a rich and diverse historical experience. Whether you want to relive the fierce battles of the First World War or simply add a touch of authenticity to your creations, this versatile model will meet your expectations.

Of course but the Hawker Fury was a British biplane and it enterd service in 1931. It was used by the UK and by several other countries but not by the USA, France and Germany. Sorry, too late for WWI...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Fury

Authenticity?

MimicMolly

This plane got teleported 15 years to the past after getting trapped in the Bermuda Triangle...at least, the type of thing that could happen in DAZland.

Random

Even worse, to me much worse, is that while the main promo picture shows the prop spinning, that's not an option when using the model. So we have an airplane which flies with it's prop not moving, i.e. blurred. And the way the textures are laid out, you can't fudge the propeller material. And you can't substitute a blurred prop from another model because if you zero opacity the prop, the cowling disappears too. You'd have to photoshop you finished picture to correct this. Not acceptable.

SimonJM

I commented on this in the thread about "today's new releases" and was tempted tp mention the 'authenticity aspect' but decided not to!  In addition I am not convinced all the wing struts are correct..

Charlie Judge

Random said:

Even worse, to me much worse, is that while the main promo picture shows the prop spinning, that's not an option when using the model. So we have an airplane which flies with it's prop not moving, i.e. blurred. And the way the textures are laid out, you can't fudge the propeller material. And you can't substitute a blurred prop from another model because if you zero opacity the prop, the cowling disappears too. You'd have to photoshop you finished picture to correct this. Not acceptable.

You could try using the wheel in Blur Crazy to simulate the prop blur.

I Simulated prop blur on this Wright Flyer by using Blur Crazy. 

1) Scaled the x axis of the propeller to widen it and then reduced opacity to about 12.5%

2) Loaded the Blur Crazy wheel, centered it over the propeller and expanded its diameter to the length of the propeller.

3) Applied The Rotary Blades material to the Blur Cray wheel and lowered the opacity.

Its not perfect but I think the result was acceptable.

 

Link to the Full Gallery image

 

Havos

Most real world plane models often attach some sort of non-commercial licence restrictions, but this one did not have it, since I assume, it was made such a long time ago (almost 100 years).

As such, why the need to create the textures for three nations that never used the plane, and miss out the main nation that did?

Roman_K2

Also on a historical note don't forget the Sea Fury (Wikipedia English link) which was hot stuff for a short time in 1945, when the company also had its head in the Sea "Hawk" jet.

I got a friendly buzz and a wing-waggle from a Sea Fury once. The example had been based at the museum in Rockcliffe and was probably being ferried to Trenton for maintenance when it circled me in a field.

Armchair historians will find the Sea Hawk's origins of interest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Sea_Hawk#Origins

NB. Harry Hawker died young and never got to see the advanced stuff. RIP.

Catherine3678ab

Random said:

Even worse, to me much worse, is that while the main promo picture shows the prop spinning, that's not an option when using the model. So we have an airplane which flies with it's prop not moving, i.e. blurred. And the way the textures are laid out, you can't fudge the propeller material. And you can't substitute a blurred prop from another model because if you zero opacity the prop, the cowling disappears too. You'd have to photoshop you finished picture to correct this. Not acceptable.

This is incorrect. The prop spins just fine.

Richard Haseltine

Catherine3678ab said:

Random said:

Even worse, to me much worse, is that while the main promo picture shows the prop spinning, that's not an option when using the model. So we have an airplane which flies with it's prop not moving, i.e. blurred. And the way the textures are laid out, you can't fudge the propeller material. And you can't substitute a blurred prop from another model because if you zero opacity the prop, the cowling disappears too. You'd have to photoshop you finished picture to correct this. Not acceptable.

This is incorrect. The prop spins just fine.

It's not that they don't spin that is being complained about, I believe, but that there is no "motion blurred" version (since Iray doesn't have motion blur in DS).

Random

That's what I meant. Sure the prop can be turned, degree by degree. but it's still static. No blur for when the plane is in flight.

Catherine3678ab

Well throw a flat disk over it and apply some texture. Or add some (((( lines [like one might for cartoon renders].

Richard Haseltine

However, if it can be rotated it probably has a group associated with the bone so it should be easy to hide.

WendyLuvsCatz

render a few images with it turning and composite in something with blur

a video editor will do motion blur for sure but it may be possible in an image editor too with several frames

Catherine3678ab

Richard Haseltine said:

However, if it can be rotated it probably has a group associated with the bone so it should be easy to hide.

Actually it's just 3 objects, 2 parented to the main one. The one for the propeller includes the tip of the plane.

PixelSploiting

If you compare it to blueprints and photos of the real airplane, it also only vaguely looks like the Hawker Fury. The entire shape and proportions are off. The original has more boxy engine compartment and much bigger radiator intake. The entire fuselage is thicker too.

miladyderyni_173d399f47

I got it mainly to trigger the St. Patrick's Day coupon, so not too bothered about the static propeller or paint jobs.

But I do have some ideas - holodeck scenario, wing walker (at an angle that doesn't show the propeller), found in great-great-great grandpa's shed, on the roof of a themed restaurant...

McGyver

I can't find any information on the Germans operating Furies... maybe the German version is supposed to be a captured aircraft?... or a alternate timeline where Germany and the UK teamed up to fight Aliens during the First War of the Worlds?

Cybersox

PixelSploiting said:

If you compare it to blueprints and photos of the real airplane, it also only vaguely looks like the Hawker Fury. The entire shape and proportions are off. The original has more boxy engine compartment and much bigger radiator intake. The entire fuselage is thicker too.

This.  There were a number of different variants which could affect the overall look of the nosecone/propellors due to different engines, but all of these far too symetical when compared to the ones the ones I'm aware of.  But seriously, this is DAZ, and has been noted in many threads before this, DAZ has a terrible history when it comes to getting basic elements of "historical" pieces that are even close to historically accurate.  From inappropriate high heels on suits of armor to movie projectors that have the mechanics of tape recorders to pirate ships that have major structural elements made of concrete, accuracy is a priority that rests firmly in the hands of the individual PA... which, in many cases, sadly, seems to be a complete non-priority. 

Random

Amen.

 

 

Cybersox said:

PixelSploiting said:

If you compare it to blueprints and photos of the real airplane, it also only vaguely looks like the Hawker Fury. The entire shape and proportions are off. The original has more boxy engine compartment and much bigger radiator intake. The entire fuselage is thicker too.

This.  There were a number of different variants which could affect the overall look of the nosecone/propellors due to different engines, but all of these far too symetical when compared to the ones the ones I'm aware of.  But seriously, this is DAZ, and has been noted in many threads before this, DAZ has a terrible history when it comes to getting basic elements of "historical" pieces that are even close to historically accurate.  From inappropriate high heels on suits of armor to movie projectors that have the mechanics of tape recorders to pirate ships that have major structural elements made of concrete, accuracy is a priority that rests firmly in the hands of the individual PA... which, in many cases, sadly, seems to be a complete non-priority. 

Richard Haseltine

Daz doesn't claim to be vetting models for historical accuracy, it is a matter for the people making them to decide what they are making and make it.

Unseen

Richard Haseltine said:

Daz doesn't claim to be vetting models for historical accuracy, it is a matter for the people making them to decide what they are making and make it.

The model is not a Daz Original and it belongs to the vendor to make sure that a model said to be historically accurate is what it is said to be. So it is not Daz's responsibility.

Roman_K2

Charlie Judge said:

You could try using the wheel in Blur Crazy to simulate the prop blur.

Wow, that is pretty cool!

Interesting promo images... but in the case of the costumed guy I think a bit less blurring on the background would be good, and a bit more on the figure itself.