Experimenting with Gabriel Panait's very good free Mig-17

  • Acting on a good tip from Cardmodels.net [not existing any longer], I downloaded a free model of a Chinese Mig-17 from Gabriel Models.


    As I found out when investigating the case of the "misplaced hatch" recurring on both DCM and Modelik versions of the Swedish "Tummelisa", Gabriel Panait from the US has designed both versions. He, and his coworkers, obviously has designed for a number of others card model companies as well.


    On the company site there is a free download of a Chinese Mig-17 offered in 1/72 scale. Do visit the site, but if you want to try it out directly, this is where you click for the 3.1 MB pdf-file.


    Als Reaktion auf einen guten Tipp von cardmodels.net habe ich mir das kostenloase Modell einer chinesischen Mig-17 von Gabriel Models heruntergeladen.


    Wie ich nämlich bei meiner Detektivarbeit im Fall der falsch plazierten Klappe, die an der schwedischen Tummelisa bei beiden Versionen von DCM und Modelik auftaucht, herausgefunden habe, sind beide von Gabriel Panait aus den USA entworfen worden. Er und seine Mitarbeiter haben offensichtlich auch noch für eine ganze Reihe anderer Kartonmodellverlage gearbeitet.


    Auf der Firmenseite gibt es den kostenlosen download einer chinesischen Mig-17 im Maßstab 1/72. Besucht die Seite, aber wenn ihr es direkt probieren möchtet, könnt ihr hier klicken für die 3.1MB große Datei.


    [Picture deleted when restoring this thread; too many for one post]


    It turns out that this model (in distinction to most free downloads) is vector designed with a very intricate pattern of rivets, and excellent colouring. What this means is that you can enlarge it beyond all limits without loss of quality!


    Now, this gave rise to a number of interesting problems, which I believe is of general interest, but first a quick look at the core pages of the download. Here's the parts page to begin with:


    Wie sich heraustellt, ist dieses Modell im Gegensatz zu anderen Downloads als Vektorgraphik entworfen inklusive aller Nieten und einer exzellenten Farbgebung. Das bedeutet, daß man es ohne Qualitätsverlust unendlich vergößern kann!


    Das führte nun zu einer Reihe von interessanten Problemen, die von gernerellem Interesse sind. Aber zuerst ein Blick auf die wichtigsten Seiten des Downloads.Hier die Bauteilseite:


    [Picture 1 below]


    The parts page look a mess at this scale, but I can assure you it is very highly detailed, as will be demonstrated below. But first the instructions page as well:


    Die Teileseite sieht in dieser Vergrößerung schlimm aus, aber ich kann auch versichern, sie ist hochdetalliert, wie unten gezeigt werden wird. Aber zunächst noch die Anleitung:


    [Picture 2 below]


    Now for the problems:


    First of all I tried opening the parts page in Illustrator. This is how it turned out:


    Jetzt zur Problematik:
    Zunächst habe ich versucht, die Teileseite in Illustrator zu öffnen. Das hier kam dabei heraus:


    [Picture 3 below]


    Clearly, there is a misfit between the vector-drawn pattern and the imported pixel-based colouring. I got the same problem when I enlarged Jan Müller's De Havilland Comet, but here the problem appears in the original scale. Clearly nothing much to do, and I have no idea what causes this problem.


    What to do now, in order to preserve the inticate pattern and nice colouring? Just to demonstrate the problem, I'll show you what the file looks like at the same magnification if you just open the pdf-file in Photoshop at the screen resolution of 72 dpi:


    Hier gibts es offensichtlich ein Problem mit dem vektorbasierten Muster und dem importierten pixelbasierten Hintergrund. Ich hatte dasselbe Problem als ich Jan Müller's De Havilland Comet vegrößert habe, aber hier tritt es schon im Originalmaßstab auf. Da kann man nichts machen, und ich habe keine Ahnung wo das Problem verursacht wird.


    Was ist nun zu tun, um die Zeichnung und die schöne Farbgebung zu erhalten? Nur um das Problem zu verdeutlichen, zeige ich euch dasselbe File in derselben Vergrößerung, wenn man es in Photoshop mit der Bildschirmauflösung von 72dpi öffnet:


    [Picture 4 below]


    Clearly useless, even at the original scale - and I wanted to enlarge it some 4,5 times to a scale of 1/16 (mostly for fun; not really intending to build it).


    Then it struck me that if I "scanned" the pdf-file at a much higher resolution it might work. This means giving Photoshop a much higher dpi value to which it should rasterize the original pdf-image when reading it (this is an automatic dialogue menu you get into when opening a pdf-file in Photoshop).


    A scale of 1/16 from a scale of 1/72 means enlarging 4,5 times. I decided I wanted the finished product at a resolution of 150 dpi. Here's how to do it:


    1) Enter the page you wish to open in Photoshop (page 4 in this case).


    2) Enter a dpi-value of 4,5 x 150 = 675 dpi when asked what resolution you wish to "scan" the original pdf. The "scanning" will take some considerable time.


    3) Save the image as a .psd file (Photoshop). Will take some time, since it is a heavy image by now (some 28 MB)


    4. Go into the "Image size" menu, and change the dpi value from 675 to 150. Important: Do NOT check the "Resample" option. This operation is instantaneous. Nothing in the image changes, except it's size as seen from the rulers. It is now 4,5 times as large - and no loss of quality from 1/72 to 1/16 at 150 dpi.


    To see if I could improve the quality further, I "rescanned" the original 1/72 pdf (page 4) at 1350 dpi, in order to arrive at 300 dpi resolution for the finished 1/16 version. It looks like this:


    Ganz klar nicht zu gebrauchen, sogar nicht im Originalmaßstab - und ich wollte es aber etwa 4,5fach vegrößern auf einen Maßstab von 1/16 (im Grunde nur zum Spaß, ich habe nicht wirklich vor es zu bauen).


    Dann bin ich drauf gekommen, daß das "scannen" des Files mit höher Auflösung funktionieren könnte. Das heißt also, Photoshop einen sehr viel höheren dpi-Wert zu geben, auf den das Bild beim Öffnen dann gerastert werden soll (das ist ein automatischer Dialog, den man bekommt, wenn man ein pdf in Photoshop öffnen möchte).


    Ein Maßstab von 1:16 ausgehend von 1:72 bedeutet eine 4,5fache Vergrößerung. Ich habe mich entschlossen, daß am Ende eine Auflösung von 150dpi herauskommen soll. Und so wird's gemacht:
    1) Die zu öffnende Seite in Photoshop eingeben (in diesem Fall Seite 4)
    2) Einen dpi-Wert von 4,5 x 150 = 675 dpi angeben, wenn man nach der Auflösung gefragt wird, in welcher das Originalfile "gescannt" werden soll. Das "Scannen" dauert dann einige Zeit.
    3) Das Bild dann als .psd abspeichern. Das dauert ein bisschen, weil das BIld jetzt ziemlich groß ist (ca. 28MB)
    4) In das Bildgröße-Menü gehen und den dpi-Wert von 675 auf 150 setzen. Wichtig: Nicht die Option "neu berechnen" wählen.
    Um zu sehen, ob ich die Qualität noch weiter verbessern kann, habe ich das Original 1/72dpf noch einmal mit 1350 dpi gescannt, um am Ende bei 300 dpi zu landen. Das Ergebnis sieht so aus:


    [Picture 5 below]


    At screen resolution, there is no discernible difference in quality between 150 and 300 dpi, but there might still be a difference when printing. Since there is no more work (just disk space) involved, I'd recommend the higher resolution.


    The images above are shown at a magnification somewhat larger than 1/33 I think. If you want to arrive at that scale the magnification is 72 / 33 = 2.18. The dpi values to enter are:


    For 300 dpi final quality: 2.18 x 300 = 654 dpi


    For 150 dpi final quality: 2.18 x 150 = 327 dpi


    Now, the model lacks formers for the fuselage, and internal structure for the wings and wheel wells (but there are wing ribs). Since the finish is so excellent, it might still be worth a try and add some scratch-built formers or keels. What do you think? Anyways, for those who would like to try it out, now you've got some tips on how to preserve the excellent quality of the original.


    In der Bildschirmauflösung gibt es keinen großen Unterschied zwischen 150 und 300 dpi, aber es wird immer noch einen beim Drucken geben. Da es nicht mehr Arbeit macht (lediglich mehr Speicherplatz benötigt) empfehle ich die höhere Auflösung.


    Die Bilder oben haben eine etwas stärkere Vergrößerung als 1/33 glaube ich. Wenn man genau bei dieser Vegrößerung ankommen möchte, dann ist der Faktor 72/33 = 2.18. Die einzugebenden dpi-Werte sind:
    Für eine Endqualität von 300 dpi: 2.18 x 300 = 654dpi
    Für eine Endqualität von 150 dpi: 2.18 x 150 = 327dpi


    Nun fehlen dem Modell leider Spanten für den Rumpf und innere Struktur für die Tragflächen und Fahrwerksschächte. Aber da das Finish so exzellent ist, könnte es sich lohnen die Spanten selber zu machen. Was denkt ihr? Auf jeden Fall haben die, die es probieren möchten, jetzt ien paar Tipps wie man die exzellente Qualität des Originals erhalten kann.


    Leif

  • Leif,


    The forward numbers are mirror reversed along the longitudinal axis of the fuselage on part 3. It should be easy to flip them using Illustrator. I'll give it a go and get back to you.


    Leif,
    die vorderen Kennzahlen sind gespiegelt entlang der Längsachse am Rumpfteil 3. Sollte aber einfach sein diese in Illustrator zu spiegeln. Ich versuchs mal und melde mich wieder.


    -Gil Russell

  • Leif,


    Had to shake some of the rust off my Illustrator skills. The following shows the finished work. It was a little more than a mirror error but was fairly easy to get it right. This kind of error is pretty easy to make. Never release anything until it's been reviewed by someone else...,


    Leif,
    meine Fähigkeiten in Illustrator waren etwas rostig. Die folgenden Bilder zeigen das Ergebnis. Es war etwas mehr als ein Spiegelfehler, aber es war recht einfach das wieder hinzubekommen. Diese Art Fehler passiert leicht. Niemals etwas veröffentlichen bevors nicht jemand anders gesehen hat...


    -Gil Russell


    [Blocked Image: http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/9424/mig17pg4r19us.jpg]


    P.S. Paint can be modified by creating a layer then "airbrush" the affected area. Use the magic wand to select the part on the original layer and use it create a vector mask. Use it cut out the overspray. Double click on the new layer and set it accordingly...,


    PS: Farbe kann verändert werden, indem man eine Ebene erzeugt und den betreffenden Bereich "airbrusht". Man verwendet den Zauberstab um das betreffende Teil zu selektieren und erzeugt damit eine Vektormaske. Die verwendet man um den Overspray auszuschneiden. Doppelklick auf die neue Ebene und passend einsetzen.

  • [Edited] ... Now hold everything everybody, and take a closer look at the original version - doesn't it seem like the parts forward of part 3 are to be joined with the joint at the bottom, instead of the top for part 3. Then there isn't a problem any longer, is there? I have difficulties positioning the patterns in my head here. Please check it out somebody with more agile brain halves than my own rusty ones...


    Just received confirmation of this from Cygielski at Cardmodels.net.


    So it turns out that the free offer really is the high-quality gift it was intended to be. Thanks to the designer, Gabriel!


    Leif

    Dankbar für die Gelegenheit auf Englisch schreiben zu dürfen, kann aber Antworten problemlos auf Deutsch lesen.

  • Quote

    Originally posted by Leif Ohlsson
    PS. (Edited in). Now hold everything everybody, and take a closer look at the original version - doesn't it seem like the parts forward of part 3 are to be joined with the joint at the bottom, instead of the top for part 3. Then there isn't a problem any longer, is there?


    Correct! I stumbled over the same detail while doing my 1:250 conversion of this fine model and had to redo my nose numbers once. Its funny how one gets mislead by the arrangement of the parts, totally disregarding the colouration.


    In fact the position of the longitudinal join changes several times throughout the fuselage. As you noted the first two pieces are joined at the bottom, then the join switches to the midline at the top. Then again after the canopy it shifts a bit off centre to the right of the midline, with the tail section again joined at the top centre.


    Why the plane was constructed this way I dont know. But I shifted most of the joins to the bottom midline for my NVA MiG. At least in this small scale it looks better that way.


    And I agree, this kit is certainly a very fine, high-quality offer of a nice looking jetfighter.


    Thomas

  • Thank you Leif for sharing the results of your experiments with Photoshop. Trying to import and scale a .pdf I spent a lot of time without finding this solution.


    Ad Gil:
    Considering your post I quickly glued together the original nose of the Mig17 and think the numbers show up correctly.


    Perhaps someone can verify wether Gil's fix really is necessary.
    The positioning of the longitudinal seams is confusing indeed, and I am convinced that my imperfect seams will spoil the plane if they are exposed on top. In spite of that the model seems to be really fine and I am looking forward for all the upcoming construction reports.


    Cheers
    Marcus

  • Hello to all


    I'm the designer of the Mig-17 and I've seen your posts.
    To comment a little, I've done it in this scale because I like to do small planes (my favorite is 1:100) but I must to conform with some others preferences.
    My scales are 1:72 for modern and WWII, 1:48 for WWI, 1:100, 1:144,1:200 for large planes. In commercial kits I put also canopies, engines, spiners and these are my technogical limits.


    Ask me and I provide you enlarged model without any loss of quality.


    Now, the reason the model is closed in several different ways: if you will notice, I try to follow the real panel lines and these are the point where I make cuts and join.
    My choice for a model is not the degree of details or the size, but more the feeling you dealing with the real plane, made smaller by mistake.
    I'm anxious to haar from you when the plane will be finished and will sit on your desk.
    For any other questions, feel free to write me at gabriel.panait@gabrielmodels.com. You can be sure you will receive my answer.
    After all, we share same passion and it is my pleasure to listen to you


    My regards


    Gabriel

  • Thanks, Jorg


    Right now, by request I enlarge it to 1:33.
    It will be some work because I forgot I overlaped an entire picture not by parts, so now I'm cutting part by part and put separately. Some work to do.
    Keep in mind it was designed as 1:72 so I can't assume it will look the same.


    Gabriel

  • Jorg, I only rescaling it. I'm not building it anymore. I don't like such scales. I'm doing only for you.Or maybe you want to know how I rescale it?In such case I can post it.
    About detailed construction technique, you can download soon a complete building manual I've done for Boeing Stearman (for a private customer from Canada).
    If I will sell online, perhaps I will put for every model a complete manual(if it will worth). You must understand this is my full time ocupation now (I leaved my job) and try to do a business in order to live.
    I try to orient more children and newbies, so a model as big at 1:33 and very complex (with inter
    nal structure) may appeal but I believe are only a few from this target which will finish it.
    As I said, you've seen the gallery and I can tell you, in reality are much more beautiful than are in the pictures. Build it and tell me after that.
    The key is the repetition.In 5 years I've built the Mig-21 in over 100 samples and even now I'm not happy. Maybe I'm crazy, I don't know, but my credo is that perfection is what close us to GOD

  • Gabriel,


    I think you just convinced many of us to become customers of your beautifully designed line of models. Using the originals panel lines to incorporate seams is new in cardmodeling so many of us were stuck in the "conventional wisdom" mode of thought. It's really nice to see a designer really applying new and original thought to the issues confronted in designing cardmodels. I wish you good luck and may you live long and prosper!


    -Gil Russell

  • Thank you very much, Gil


    You outlined exactly the spirit.
    Even the technology is the same, every model has its own particularities.


    I have over 90 models done in 5 years, but I'm happy with the results only for a few. Even the design process I do give me perfect fit from the first attempt,
    I redesign it in order to make it easier to assembly and to look more closely to real plane.
    It is a process of adaptation. After few succesfull attempts in this way to approach the cardmodels, I believe you willl be hooked up.


    And of course, we need something to challenge our brain constantly.
    I'm scared about what is happening with younger generations and I'm trying what I can to stop this process of "not thinking" attitude.
    Maybe, with help from people like you and the others, we'll make a little difference.

  • Happy news! Gabriel, the designer, has already enlarged the free Mig-17 to a scale of 1/33.
    It is on 6 pages, instead of only 1 page.


    Beautiful work; great praise to Gabriel!


    (Prospective builders still face the challenge of designing their own framework though - but what is card modeling but a source of fresh challenges?).


    Click here to get the 1/33 Mig-17 on six pages pdf (4.4 MB), parts only, as just announced on Cardmodels.net [link lost with the demise of Cardmodels.net]. For instructions, see the original 1/72 download above.


    Many thanks again, Gabriel!


    Leif

    Dankbar für die Gelegenheit auf Englisch schreiben zu dürfen, kann aber Antworten problemlos auf Deutsch lesen.

    Edited once, last by Leif Ohlsson ().

  • Try without internal structure.
    If the paper is to thin, reinforce it adding another layer or more.


    Join two modules so the edges fit perfectly and this will force these modules to take the correct shapes.


    Gabriel


    PS


    And send me some pictures, please.Your success make me happier than I am when I build it myself.

  • Now that the designer of the Mig-17, Gabriel Panait, so graciously and in record time, has come up with a beautiful version in 1/33, I hope it is OK if I continue with some general experiences learned from experimenting with these types of documents (the same problems might occur again, and I doubt that there are many other designers that would be so obliging as Gabriel!).


    1. Solution to the problem with mismatches:


    If you have Adobe Illustrator or similar vector program which can open page 4 of the 1/72 pdf file, do so. If there is a mismatch between the vector pattern and the bitmap pattern, click in some part of the bitmap pattern. You will get a big highlight encompassing most of the image.


    Now choose the tool which enables you to adjust height & width. In illustrator it looks like this:


    [Picture 1 below]


    Starting wherever you like and adjust the bitmap until it fits. Cygielski at Cardmodels.net [link lost] preferred to get it right at the top left corner first, and then adjust the bottom right corner to a perfect fit. I did it from all four sides, doing the horizontal fit first, then the vertical. Matter of taste, but in any case it only takes a few minutes.


    The result is a perfect & scaleable version - although you may run into trouble when trying to divide up the parts on several sheets later on.


    2. An interesting comparison:


    Studying Gabriel's new 1/33 version, I found it even more beautifully patterned, and so decided to see what it looked like if imported into Photoshop. Very surprisingly the result was worse than if imported (and enlarged) from the 1/72 version! Here's what the comparison looked like on my screen:


    [Picture 2 below]


    The pdf orignal files are in the left column, and the Photoshop scanned files are in the right column. Top row is from the 1/72 version, and bottom row from the 1/33 version. All images are blown up to comparable size, roughly a scale of 1/16 on the screen.


    Studying the four pictures (do click in it, to view it full-size), it is immediately clear that in the 1/72 pdf original version the lines and rivets (vector-drawn) are comparatively larger (same line thickness, smaller model). This clearly gives a better result if you scan the original into Photoshop (as detailed in previous posts). Working from the 1/72 orignal, there are losses, but the quality is acceptable.


    Studying the 1/33 version (bottom row) you will first see that the lines are comparatively thinner, which gives next to unacceptable result if you scan into Photoshop. Many fine details are lost.


    But the most interesting fact is that there actually a larger number of rivets in the 1/33 version. Clearly a feature of the vector-based program used. Lines have been set to a certain amount of rivets per inch (or centimeter), which results in more rivets at the larger scale.


    Well, all this may be of academic interest in the present case. But if you happen to come across another similar model, it might be good to know that enlarging from a much smaller original might in fact be better than from a larger original, if the pattern is vector-based.


    But of course, the superior result in this case will be achieved by using Gabriels 1/33 original "as is"!


    Leif

  • To continue this exploration of possibilities for the Gabriel Panait free model of the Mig 17, here are some very good 3-view drawings of the original aircraft:


    [Picture below]


    You can download them from http://membres.lycos.fr/wings2/3vues/3vues.html


    The interesting part about these drawings is that the fuselage crossections are circular throughout - which means that you can glue up Gabriels beautiful fuselage parts and then insert circular formers wherever you think they might be needed - a pretty easy task if you have a circle cutter!


    Leif

  • [Edited in 2008: Originally there were links here to a very good walkaround site, and also different Mig-17 colour schemes. That source is gone today. Luckily I saved a few images which appear at the bottom, after the saved colour schemes.]


    Since Gabriel has been kind enough to provide a vector design, the bitmap pattern is easy to isolate from the joint lines and rivet vector-drawn pattern. Recolouring therefore is much easier than for a scanned version of a printed design.


    Perhaps someone would like to make an Angolan, or a Bulgarian, or a North Vietnamese Mig-17? Go right ahead! The patterns attached at the bottom of this post include colour samples with Humbrol colour code numbers - very nice!


    Leif

  • Leif,


    Thanks for sharing the site! It is nicely organized with great detail information for the modeler.


    I've been wondering when builds of Gabriel's work will begin to show up. I am tempted but have other things to finish up right now. I've been toying with the idea of trying out the model using aluminum tooling foil for an all aluminum look. Maybe do the panel line scribe and rivet line treatment. Decals out of tissue and need to "melt" a canopy to finish off the wish list...,


    -Gil Russell

  • Continuing my experiments with the Gabriel Panait Mig-17 free download, I am realizing more and more what a wonderfully designed model this is. The rivet work and joint lines are just incredibly complicated. Gabriel must have had access to some very advanced source material to be able to accomplish this - plus a lot of patience.


    I know, since I have gone over his entire design, trying to solve the problem of the too thin lines for printing. A short summary of the problem, and an attempt to solve it follows here:


    The problem: It is a vector design. The lines are 0.01 mm thick - which I think is way to thin to show up on my lousy inkjet printer. The thickness stays the same, if you enlarge the design in a vector program - plus the rivet density increases relatively (same absolute distance even if it should be larger in proportion to the enlargement; Gabriel's own 1/33 version in fact suffers from this problem).


    If, on the other hand, you enlarge the design in a pixel-based program, such as Photoshop, the lines are too thin to register properly. This is what started this whole chain of experimenting.


    Solution: I have gone over the entire vector design in Adobe Illustrator, saving sets of selections of "small rivets", "medium rivets", and "large rivets" - plus "thin lines" and "medium lines". This is when I discovered the almost infinite amount of detailed lines Gabriel has put into this design - which was made for a scale of only 1/72!


    Once this was done (which took some three days!), it was an easy task to experiment with line thicknesses for the five categories of lines. I have now done that, and saved the result as a pdf-file. Below is a sample attached.


    If you have Adobe Illustrator, you will be able to open this file and get the same saved selections, which means that you can do your own experiments without having to spend days on selecting the different kinds of lines. You will also find that I have separated out the bitmap and some of the vector colouring in different layers, so recolouring is much simplified, if you are bent that way.


    If you are not vector-equipped, I think you will find that enlarging the pdf-file in the manner described early in this thread will yield a much better result than using the original free download (lines are now thicker). The rivets will also be more realistic than using Gabriel's 1/33 version (so kindly provided).


    On the other hand, if you are vector-equipped, you will be able to change the thickness of the lines yourself. If there's any interest at all I will get back with a description of how to do that in Illustrator (just learned it myself by doing it), so you can work on Gabriels 1/33 version if you feel up to it.


    Also, please indicate in posts below if you wish to have the adjusted pdf-file. In that case, perhaps Michael and the rest of the administrators will provide some space for it in the archive on the site. It is 3.4 MB (just page four of the original free download).


    Leif


    PS. In the link provided by TomTom below to his Mig-17 recolouring, change "kartonbau-aktiv.de" to "kartonbau.de". Since I can't do that in TomTom's post, here's the correct link: Mini-Baubericht MiG-17F 1:250

  • Quote

    Originally posted by Leif Ohlsson
    Perhaps someone would like to make an Angolan, or a Bulgarian, or a North Vietnamese Mig-17? Go right ahead!


    Hello Leif,


    as I wrote in my previous post, I already made a North Vietnamese conversion of this MiG-17. Additionally Im in the process of doing a second, camouflaged one. Some pictures are available via this link. It might not be exactly what you had in mind, as it is in 1:250 scale.


    But my source might be usable for larger scales too (600dpi in 1:72). Below I attached some pictures. The first one shows an overview of the cammo and markings layer, the second and third show details in the native resolution.


    If someone wants to try to mate this layer with the vector based original I would be happy to provide it.
    I am not able to try it out myself as I dont own Illustrator or similar vector-based stuff (I imported the original files into Photoshop, so worked with a raster).


    The fourth picture shows my second, work in progress NVA MiG.


    Thomas

  • Those are great repaints! I apologize for missing out on your earlier building thread, TomTom.


    I fully realize the problems of not having a vector program. This might be of some help. I have separated out the rivet patterns and joint lines (very complicated pattern!), so that you can overlay it on any repaint.


    At the same time I have separated out the different coloured parts, to the degree that was necessary in order to be able to recolour parts.


    The three layers have been saved as separate pdf-files, which makes it possible to import each of them into e.g. Photoshop, in three different layers. From there on, you can rearrange and recolour freely.


    Each layer includes the Gabriel Panait signature in upper left and lower right corners, so alignment should be easy. Postion layer 1 at the top, and layer 3 at the bottom.


    In addition a full, composite, three-layer version has been made. For those of you who have Illustrator it will open into three separate layers. In addition you will be able to utilize the selections of thin, medium, and large rivets, plus thin and thick lines, in order to be able to change the thicknesses of these.


    [Edited in 2008: Here I supplied links to three separated layers. I can't do that today, since I lost my server. But if anybody should be interested, I still have the files: "sep-1.pdf", "sep-2.pdf", "sep-3.pdf" (around 2 MB), plus the "full.pdf" (around 4 MB). The last file is a pdf of the separated Illustrator drawing wit layers and ready-made selections.]


    The full version looks exactly like Gabriel's orginal. (However, if you open it in Illustrator you will find that the lines have been slightly thickened, as per above. This doesn't show up in the pdf version). And this is how the three separate layers look (they really are highly detailed, which isn't visible in this image):

  • To make this thread come full circle, I have now "scanned" my three layers into Photoshop, creating an excellent raw material for rearranging and possibly recolouring. Another one of those North Vietnamese patterns look tempting - just to be different from TomTom and to create some variety.


    The important part was to check whether the enlarging of the line patterns would yield the desired result - clearer lines in Photoshop. And judging from the screenshots attached below, it does seem so. Please go back and compare with the original attempts earlier in this thread. Every little detail is now visible.


    In the screenshots you will find some of the amazing details that the designer, Gabriel Panait, has provided highlighted. Look at those tiny hatches - and imagine them some five times smaller, which is what 1/72 would be like!


    All in all I am pretty pleased by this experiment. And impressed by what you can do in Illustrator. Now I know how to translate the result into Photoshop, which was the object of the exercise.


    Leif

  • Hallo Leif,


    Nicely and well done! Understanding the intricacies between Illustrator and Photoshop takes time and requires a lot of persistence and practice. At first I found Illustrator's user interface to be somewhat counter-intuitive. It wasn't till I realized that Illustrator was aimed at taking the graphic artist from pen & ink and airbrush into the computer graphics World that it all made sense.


    It's good to see coverage of this tool in a real World card application.


    -Gil Russell

  • Trying to learn how to best go about recolouring the Gabriel Panait free Mig-17 model, I came upon some unexpected peculiarities in Photoshop and Illustrator, respetively. No doubt, this is already well-known to professional designers, but since this thread is for amateurs like me, I thought it would be worth recounting the different stumbling stones on the learning curve.


    I wanted to make a North Vietnamese version, and had already made suitable colour samples for this. The original Chinese version had been transferred to a layered Photoshop file (rivets and lines in one layer, coloured bitmap in another) as already described.


    From there on in, it was comparatively simple to make a trial recolouring with four colours - for a trial I just followed the Chinese pattern. A final version will be attempted, closer to the original.


    The problem arose when I studied the result in Photoshop more closely - see the first of the two attached screenshots below. Turns out that the rivet and line pattern is next to invisible over one of the green colours. What could be the reason for this?


    The rivet and line pattern in Illustrator was 60 percent black. I figured that when imported into Photoshop, this was interpreted as 60 procent opacity black, which might make them invisible if displayed over a certain shade of the same general "greyness" (even if the colour in this case is green).


    The question was: Would the result be the same in Illustrator? After several failed attempts to copy and paste the bitmap from Photoshop to Illustrator (clipboard was to large to export), I finally found that you should use the option to "Mount" the photoshop image into an empty layer in Illustrator. This worked.


    I have yet to learn, though, how to "link" such an Illustrator layer to the Photoshop original, so that any changes made in Photoshop will be reflected in Illustrator automatically. Is that at all possible?


    Anyways, the result was interesting, as can be seen in the second screenshot below. The rivets and lines are now clearly visible, also over the problematic green areas. Could this be a result of Illustrator creating 60 percent grey by mixing black and white, instead of changing opacity?


    Clearly, the way to go is to export the rivet and line pattern, plus the original bitmap pattern into Photoshop; make your recolouring of the bitmap; and then mount that in Illustrator again, replacing the original Chinese bitmap. Further recolouring (of vector parts) to be done in Illustrator. (When recolouring in Photoshop you need the rivet pattern for reference in order to match patterns between parts, and the original bitmap as a template for the parts; in separate layers of course. )


    If you then wish to export the finished product into Photoshop is a matter of taste. The reason would be for ease of scaling (no changes necessary in rivet patterns; see earlier posts).


    Leif

  • I keep exploring the proper technique for recolouring an already excellent kit, like the Gabriel Panait free download of the Mig-17. Here's a distinct improvement I found by fiddling around.


    Remember the problem in the last post?: If you opened the original Illustrator (vector) file in Photoshop, the rivets and patterns were next to invisible over certain shades of colour. The hypothesis was that Photoshop (which did the conversion work) created grey lines by interpreting them as translucent, while Illustrator (where the problem wasn't visible) created grey tones by mixing opaque black and white.


    It then struck me that if there was a way to let Illustrator do the conversion work, the opacity of the line pattern would be preserved. It turns out (of course) that there is such a way. If you search under "Edit" in Illustrator you will find an "Export" option, and you get a wide range of choices for which kind of file you want to create.


    Here comes the really good part: Choosing ".psd" (Photoshop), you get a further range of options, among them recreating all the layers in the original Illustrator file. This is of course ideal, since all the work I have been doing in previous posts to create individual Photoshop files of all the layers, and then recombine them manually, is done automatically!


    There are further options, such as at what resolution you want your Photoshop file. 150 dpi and 300 dpi (coarse and fine) are given, plus an option for choosing your own preferred quality. I started by trying for 800 dpi and found that the computer just stood chugging away for hours - and then couldn't finish the job.


    150 dpi was quick, but the quality was deemed too low. 300 dpi finally succeeded, after having increased the memory allocation (I'm on a Mac) for Illustrator.The time was moderate (less than an hour on my low-end computer).


    The result is awesome - you get your fully layered Photoshop file - and the line pattern is clearly visible above all shades of colours. See the attached screenshot below for the successfull result!


    Now 300 dpi clearly isn't enough for creating a Photoshop file suitable for enlarging to 1/16 (which requires 1350 dpi if you want a finished 300 dpi result). But this isn't a problem, since the object of making a Photoshop file at this stage is just to create a bitmap of the camouflage pattern, and the camo pattern doesn't have to be that detailed (after all, it's spray-painted by hand on the original!). This will be imported ("mounted") back into Illustrator, as already described


    The finished 1350 dpi Photoshop version will not have to be layered. It remains to be seen whether Illustrator can do this conversion (which I hope - scanning a single layer composite image might not take the same amount of computer power). If not, I'll just let Photoshop do that particular conversion, since I've already determined that this works.


    Leif


    PS. The work I've done before, separating the different layers and making separate Photoshop files of them, then recombining them, isn't wasted. It means that anybody who wishes to recolour the Mig-17, but has no access to Illustrator, will be able to do the recolouring in a high-quality Photoshop file.

  • Going back over old, unfinished business I found this thread, and the old unfinished files on my hard disk. To make a long story very short, I have finished a Vietnamese repainting in Photoshop. I did this in 1/16 scale, but that file is impossibly large to share.


    Rescaling this huge file back into its original 1/72 the end result was a 4,5 MB heavy pdf file, which is reasonable. Anybody interested in that, just tell me and I'll be happy to send it over your regular email. The file is just this one page, so you will need Gabriel Panait's original free model in 1/72 with instructions (download link in upper right-hand corner).


    If you, like me, think that Gabriel Panaits original pattern for the outer skin of the Mig17 is absolutely superb and could make a basis for a larger model, possible with internal self-designed framework, I would be glad to share other versions of the work so far to anybody seriously intending to take this project forward another step.


    I attach illustrations of the 1/72 version in Vietnamese livery, plus a black-and-white version to demonstrate the quality of Gabriel's original work.


    Apart from the Vietnamese pattern I have changed the colours of the cockpit interior and a few other details like wheel disks, ejection seat, and instrument panel to what I believe is slightly more realistic colours.


    Note that one set of canopy parts has been coloured internal blue, and another in the proper exterior colours. Originally, the two sets were intended for a solid canopy, and a drawn transparent canopy, respectively (instructions and templates for this are included in the original download). I believe it would be a shame to build a model like this without transparent canopy, so I took the liberty of using one set for the internal parts of a transparent canopy. If you want to build a solid paper canopy, you will have to make some quick editing of the file yourself.


    I attach photos I found on the web which seem to depict the original "1905" Vietnamese Mig17, now collecting dust in some desert, unknown where. Finally, a profile in colour of that particular aircraft, gratifyingly with Humbrol colour codes, is attached. That web source, unfortunately, is extinct so this is just a saved copy.

  • Quote

    Original von Leif Ohlsson


    If you, like me, think that Gabriel Panaits original pattern for the outer skin of the Mig17 is absolutely superb and could make a basis for a larger model, possible with internal self-designed framework, I would be glad to share other versions of the work so far to anybody seriously intending to take this project forward another step.


    Hi Leif, Gabriel already did this in 1:33. It is hidden somewhere in Cardmodels.com.
    The threat has got lost during the removal to zealot. But I am sure, it is still there


    See also the original threat here:
    Kostenlose Mig 17


    Greetings
    Andreas

  • Andreas (and other interested),


    I've got the 1:33 files. In my view they have a shortcoming. Since Gabriel worked in a vector graphic programme to make those very fine lines, the rivet patterns didn't turn out too well in the enlargement process. The rivets simply got unrealistically small, and too densely spaced.


    This can be avoided by letting the lines get thicker proportionally when enlarging. The distance between rivets than are proportionally the same. Anbody with a vector programme can do it from the original download.


    I've done the work in my 1/16 enlarged and recoloured file. If you are willing to make the rearranging of parts yourself, I can provide you with a file in any scale you wish, and both colour schemes (Chinese & Vietnamese) incorporated.


    If you are serious about wanting to build the model in another specific scale, we could probably ask the administrators to provide the appropriate files as downloads from here. (Specify Chinese, Vietnamese, black & white only, or all of them, plus the scale you wish to have the file in.)


    As an example, the black & white version in 1:16 is 2 MB. With both colour patterns at some reasonable resolution, it is 10 MB. For other scales the filesize would be proportionally smaller.


    Again, you would have to do the rearranging of parts yourself, in a vector graphic programme.


    Please state your interest if you really would like to have the files. I have left the project, but the work is done, and I'd be happy to see someone use the result of it.


    Leif

    Dankbar für die Gelegenheit auf Englisch schreiben zu dürfen, kann aber Antworten problemlos auf Deutsch lesen.

    Edited 2 times, last by Leif Ohlsson ().

  • The model was designed to be build in 1/72 , the enlarged version to 1/33 is actually similar with the 1/72 . So what's the problem? Well, the plane doesn't have a internal structure so is very fragile. I've build it in 1/36 and I was not very satisfied .
    So be aware, who will build it in 1/16 must build also a card skeleton to avoid a disaster.

  • Hello Dragos,


    You see, I thought the problem was rather interesting from a designer's point of view. Let me see if I can illustrate it.


    The first picture below shows a detail from Gabriel's original 1:72 version. Note particularly the large rivets surrounding the wing cut-out.


    Next, the same detail is shown in approximately the same size for his 1:33 rescaled version. Notice how there are approximaely double the amount of rivets around the wing and relatively thinner panel & rivet lines. (This corresponds to the more than doubling of scale, which I hadn't quite realized at the time.)


    I thought the 1:72 version had the more realistic spacing of rivets, which is why I started to think about it. I thought, that must have been the way Gabriel wanted it, so why did he change it for the 1:33 version?


    At the time, I had just enlarged Gabriel's 1:72 original files to 1:16 - and I didn't get that effect, so I started to think why. Eventually I found out that you could enlarge a vector drawing in two ways - either you let the lines and patterns get enlarged as well, or you could elect to have them the same thickness and spacing as the original scale (which would result in very thin lines, very dense patterns, if you enlarge 4,5 times to 1:16!).


    I think Gabriel, without thinking, did the latter in his 1:33 version, while I - totally by accident - happened to do the other thing. See the third image. This my 1:16 version. Imagine how dense the rivets would be, and how thin the lines, if I had happened to do it the same way as Gabriel.


    The result is what's interesting. If you allow lines and patterns to get enlarged as well, you keep the spacing between rivets in this case, and the relative thickness of lines.


    Which is good. But not self-evident. Not even for an expert.


    Best regards, Leif


    PS. Otherwise I am glad you noted the need for an internal framework. I suspected as much. Luckily the cross-section of the Mig-17 is circular throughout, which would make it much easier.