P04 help please:

[kurusu]

Looks much better now.

[Ron Wood]

Looks great! It appears that you have used a reflective property on the receiver which gives a double image of the knurled toggle knob and the frame ramp, making them look twice as thick. The demarcation line between the object and the reflection is evident, so I hope the "fix" merely involves eliminating the reflection.
Ron

[9x19]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your comments. Yes, the reflection of the toggle is unfortunate, but in truth black or blue/black is a very difficult colour to light well. A small movement of the model within the lighting zone can make colours change totally, and as you have seen cause surfaces to create unwanted reflections. It is difficult to get the detail out without getting too many reflections or blown highlights. The human eye has a much greater dynamic range than any camera made or any imaging software can duplicate.

Attached is another image viewed from the top of the Luger. Notice how flat looking the back strap of the framework is. Also note how queer the reflection of the ejector spring looks. It takes an age to get each viewpoint to look just right (at least for me it does). I am no graphic artist and all I know about the imaging software I use is self-taught.

Now that the mechanics are sorted I am going to update all three assemblies and then start playing around with the lighting, adding emissive planes, etc.., etc., until I get the results that hopefully best display each individual gun.

When I have that done I might go on to producing some cut-away images to display the inner workings.

Before I finally depart this forum I will post the end results. It could be a while yet though!

Regards,

Dave

[9x19]

Hi Guys,

I will be starting on the cut-away views soon, but in the meantime I have adjusted the lighting on the 3 gun image:

Regards,

Dave

[sheepherder]

Originally Posted by 9x19

Hi Guys,

I will be starting on the cut-away views soon...

Interesting. Are you planning on doing any revolving images???

[9x19]

An interesting question Sheepherder,

I have never done a pirouetting assembly before, but I do know the software I use has turntable capabilities. Not sure how well the lighting will work under those circumstances. I also don't think there would be any chance of posting it on this site as the file would be far too big. What you have already seen in the images above is vastly reduced in quality.

I may try your suggestion at some time in the future, but as I already have two projects on the go at the moment - a P38 and a British Sten Gun MkII, I don't think it will be any time soon.

Regarding the P38, I have all the parts fully modelled with the exception of the slide and frame. These are about 75% done. They are in limbo at the moment because the drawings I have are not very clear and have some "blown out" details. If any of you guys have better copies of these two drawings (or know where I might get them, I don't mind paying for good quality copies) I would be most grateful.

Regards all,

Dave

[9x19]

Hi Cirelaw,

I am not certain why two versions of the front sight are shown on Pg.2 of the blueprints. That caused me some confusion. "kleinst" translates as "midget" or "sub-miniature" and the other sight is obviously the "normal" one fitted to most lugers.

Can anyone enlighten me as to the reason for the mini version?

Regards,

Dave

[DonVoigt]

Originally Posted by 9x19

Hi Cirelaw,

I am not certain why two versions of the front sight are shown on Pg.2 of the blueprints. That caused me some confusion. "kleinst" translates as "midget" or "sub-miniature" and the other sight is obviously the "normal" one fitted to most lugers.

Can anyone enlighten me as to the reason for the mini version?

Regards,

Dave

Perhaps it just means "shorter" in this instance; there were multiple height front sights for targeting the luger.

On my drawings(may be different from above" the "normal" sight is 7mm, the Kleinstmass sight is 6.7mm, and the "grossmass" sight is 7.3mm Tall.