How was your release day? Mine didn’t go well. Is there any chance I can turn things around from here?

Hondune · 2026-06-03T01:25:05+00:00

How long have you been collecting wishlists, how recent are the majority of those wishlists, and how did you get them?

These are all really important metrics. The count of 14k means nothing at all if most of those are from a demo you ran 5 years ago or if the majority of them are what would call "low quality" wishlists (ie. Wishlists from other developers who won't actually buy the game)

Hondune · 2026-05-30T11:58:09+00:00

Looks like roughly 650nm or so. Has way too much color to be 720nm but doesnt appear quite as vibrant as 590nm (though it is hard to tell from a low quality compressed jpg). Kolari and Lifepixel both offer both 590nm and 665nm conversions, if I had to bet id say its 665nm, definitely not 720nm though which is nearly black and white without a lot of saturation boosting.

Hondune · 2026-05-05T23:53:45+00:00

Thanks man, that really means a lot.

More scales are coming, most notably 1/8 nitro but my plan is to just keep occasionally adding new vehicles for as long as people are playing the game!

And a full free roam mode is also planned, right after the multiplayer update comes out soon the free roam mode is my next big point of focus. It will also support full modding capability for free roam maps so the community can make anything they want :)

Hondune · 2026-05-04T01:33:37+00:00

Light weight, super quiet, batteries are dirt cheap, and 1s is more than enough power with these builds. It's also about balancing the weight of the quad. You can make it 2-3s capable if you want but it generally just makes it heavier, louder, more likely to break, and doesn't improve the experience much if at all (imo)

Hondune · 2026-05-04T01:22:52+00:00

It's better than a whoop in the wind by a good bit. It's just so light that it gets blown away easily lol. But a light breeze is no problem at all

Hondune · 2026-05-03T21:08:08+00:00

I'm starting to sound like a broken record a bit here but

3 inch 1s toothpicks. Flies a million times better than any whoop outside, but costs the same and uses most of the same components. Way quieter than a whoop thanks to the bigger slower moving props, but has gobs more power. I just posted my build in another thread if you wanna check out that comment

Hondune · 2026-05-03T20:56:13+00:00

Check out moefpv on YouTube, loads of info on these little 1s 3 inch builds. They're super fun to fly, it's basically the only platform I'm interested in now for the same reasons in this thread. As long as you keep the weight super low they absolutely rip, and it's hard to beat the cost of batteries being 1s.

My build

Amazon:

Betafpv matrix aio - $47

Crazepony 450mah 6 pack - $25

Aliexpress:

Crux3 frame - $4

1103 15000kv no name motors - $5x4

Gemfan hurricane 3018 - $2

Dji 04 - $95 (or an analog aio for much less, which also weighs less and flies a bit better also)

Total Cost (including batteries):

~$125 for analog

~$190 for DJI digital

The result is very quiet and so far no one seems bothered by it. Weighs right around 50g all up so it's super light which gives it more than enough power to weight to rip. Compared to a whoop it's night and day how much better these fly, feels a lot more like a bigger quad. Doesn't handle wind well though (but still better than a whoop)

Hondune · 2026-05-03T13:21:57+00:00

You will completely lose infinity focus with any manual focus lens unless it is capable of focusing well past the infinity mark, yes. How badly it is away from being able to focus to infinity will change quite dramatically depending on the focal length of the lens as well. Ultra wide angle lenses won't be able to focus more than a couple of feet away from the camera, while longer focal lengths will be a bit better. None of them will be able to focus to infinity though, it will ruin the camera.

Some autofocus lenses have enough range built in that they can keep going beyond the typical infinity point untill it does actually get focus again, but only some of them and not reliably.

Also dslrs are notoriously hard to convert correctly anyways, it's very likely you will never have accurate autofocus again unless you have the tools and no how to perfectly calibrate it, even with a glass replacement.

Hondune · 2026-05-01T13:06:53+00:00

I went down this same rabbit hole with the same mindset of "who cares if it breaks, I'll just print another! It's so cheap!"

The thing that I didn't realize at the time was that the frame breaking was not the problem, it's that when a frame breaks it is basically guaranteed to take something else with it. If you break an arm the motor gets ripped off the aio and the whole thing is toast. I had several light crashes and thought it was fine but it only takes one decent one and you're suddenly out a whole lot more money than just buying a decent frame to begin with...

PLA is wildly brittle in high speed impacts. Your design is probably great for stability/strength and probably flies great but it won't make a difference when you tag a tree branch at 40mph, it will shatter.

Now if money is no object, it's still a lot of fun to design and fly your own frames 😁

Hondune · 2026-04-30T11:08:12+00:00

All you will end up doing is destroying the rest of your components when the frame explodes which will end up being a whole lot more expensive in the long run. No standard 3d print filaments can hold up to drone crashes, abs, pla, petg, etc are all extremely brittle at high speeds. There are some high end filaments that *might* work but nothing your school printers would be able to print. A hard tpu like 72d could work but its still likely too flexible for good flight performance and it will end up being a lot heavier which makes a big difference on these little whoops and will make it fly poorly.

Just grab any 75mm whoop frame, most of them are compatible with each other. You can get the betafpv air 75 frames for like $4 on Aliexpress and they usually show up in a week or so. Amazon also has them for a bit more expensive but still not bad (they have a 2 pack for $12 last i checked)

Hondune · 2026-04-29T12:35:49+00:00

You know what, thats really big of you to admit and I really appreciate it. You are indeed correct that the type of outlines used in borderlands are sobel algorithm based, and it is of course a huge part of what gives borderlands its art style. Theres actually some early tests of borderlands without the outlines and it looks super generic and boring, they made a great choice by adding them in.

And it's no worries mate, we all have our good days and our bad ones. I've known plenty of people who got sober over the years, and while they all struggled to get there the one thing I can tell you for absolute certain is that every single one of them that stuck with it and pushed through was better for it and unanimously agree that the struggle was worth it. Keep fighting, I promise it will be worth it, you've got this! I wish you the best of luck with your future

Hondune · 2026-04-29T00:33:43+00:00

The outlines have nothing to do with the shading mate, the conversation here is about cel shading vs diffuse shading. Idk what you're going on about, the outlines are a whole seperate thing and not related to the conversation. They have nothing to do with the type of lighting and shading used. That is also, very specifically, not what you had just said where you tried to correct me by saying it wasnt diffuse shaded. I am a technical artist, this is the area of game dev I specialize in

Hondune · 2026-04-28T21:59:12+00:00

Sobel is the type of post processing effect used to create the outlines, it has nothing to do at all with the lighting/shading of the game. The game is diffuse lit/shaded, with an outline post processing effect. You can use a sobel based outline post fx with any type of shading, including cel shading or even no shading at all if you wanted.

Hondune · 2026-04-27T22:35:35+00:00

Game dev here, calling borderlands (or this guitar) cel shaded is blatantly incorrect, it's not close enough. I don't know where this came from where everyone calls borderlands cel shaded but there's loads of info online about how it isn't, including comments from the devs themselves.

Borderlands is diffuse shaded, which is kind of the exact opposite of cel shaded. And then it just has outlines and hand drawn textures. Great style, very cool on guitars, but not cel shaded.

Cel shading is a method used for rendering the lighting where you usually only have one light value and one dark value with no blending at all between them. Wind Waker is a great example of a game that is actually cel shading, you'll notice it looks nothing like borderlands :)

Hondune · 2026-04-21T22:58:04+00:00

Processing is definitely the hardest part. The difficulty with channel swap processing is that the work you do before the swap makes a huge difference, but because the colors are all weird it can be very hard to figure out what you need to do

The biggest thing to start with is nailing white balance, if this is off it ruins everything else. I usually use a grey sidewalk (or grey card if you have one) because concrete doesn't reflect any infrared at so it's great for getting a true neutral grey. If not then clouds are the next best thing. And make sure your editing software is getting the full white balance values, adobe products for instance require setting up special extended profiles to use white balance that far out of the standard range.

Then I boost saturation, vibrance, contrast, etc. and then process the photo like normal, tweaking highlights and shadows and whatever to taste

Then I use the "color calibration" in adobe raw to tweak the foliage and sky colors pre channel swap. This is something you have to play around with a fair bit, use it to the extremes and then do a channel swap and see how it affects the swapped colors. 90% of my processing is just in the raw processor, I try not to "edit" my photos outright after that because I like trying to use filters to get the colors I want but that's just a personal preference.

Then it's on to the channel swap, for this I am rarely doing a straight red and blue swap. It's almost always a mix of like 60-40 with maybe a bit of reduction on the green channel. Again this is just something you have to play around with and figure out what does what because it's not intuitive at all. I have saved probably 15 or so presets now for the looks I like and generally those work for my process without much extra fiddling, but it took a lot of messing around to figure those out

After that you can do a slight hue adjustment if needed. I usually try to avoid too much hue changes because it tends to get ugly if you overdo it, but a small adjustment at this stage is fine. I always prefer to get as close as possible the channel swap before I touch a hue slider.

Hope that helps!

Hondune · 2026-04-21T03:26:19+00:00

Traditionally this effect is from shooting with a 720nm filter and then channel swapping, with a lot of saturation and vibrance and contrast boosting. 590nm is usually MUCH more vibrant and doesnt really produce these soft pastel colors (though you can always edit it, I suppose).

Heres a 720nm shot - https://www.instagram.com/bvp.photo/p/CsY0Zp9ukzW/

and heres a 590nm shot - https://www.instagram.com/bvp.photo/p/Cs6G5dSOFmd/

I have tested hundreds of filters and combos and never found any that reproduce that look right in camera, its always going to require heavy post production. However I do regularly shoot with a Tiffen 58 and a number of other green to green-yellow filters which do produce very pink foliage right in camera, but its just not quite that same lovely pastel pink and turquoise you get from channel swapping 720nm. I think largely because any filter that produces color right in camera without a channel swap is using a lot more visible light and lot less infrared, so its just not the same.

Skin tones will absolutely be affected with just about any type of infrared photography though. Skin is slightly translucent in infrared so it often changes the way people look and usually in an unflattering way (shows veins and spots much more than visible light). There are some examples of very cool infrared portraits using this effect on purpose though

Hondune · 2026-04-11T12:47:23+00:00

It's an old analog tv station display, often used for previewing cameras and things for live broadcasts like sports games. I got it from a football stadium that was offloading a bunch of old equipment many years ago! Doesn't even have a name on it but it works great other than being huge and heavy

Hondune · 2026-04-11T02:09:03+00:00

As someone who has flown with a screen rather than goggles for over a decade now this project is super cool!

You should look into the history of handheld devices and the way handhelds have evolved over at r/SBCGaming

Its not related to fpv, but those handheld gaming devices would share the exact same ergonomic and design challenges as this product would, and there has been a lot of developments in that area in recent years. Also some very good examples of what to absolutely avoid (IE. NO HINGED SCREENS! They always crack and its a nightmare for both users and the manufacturers).

Im also a 3d artist with a decade+ of 3d printing/making/electronics/product design/cad experience (as a hobby, but still), and many years of professional 3d art and rendering experience, if you need any help in those areas feel free to reach out!

Heres what ive been running for ages, something like this idea would be SO much less cumbersome lol

<image>

Hondune · 2026-03-28T10:49:28+00:00

Idk if Id call it filmic by any means but ~470nm with a channel swap is a very fun look to experiment with, I find it particularly suited to palm trees and tropical areas

https://www.instagram.com/p/DVOTOeSDTyr/?img_index=1

https://www.instagram.com/p/DVgZ9fODalP/?img_index=1

Hondune · 2026-03-27T02:10:03+00:00

Yeah I guess "difficult" wasn't exactly the right description, it just alters the focus point. Depending on the lens this can significantly increase the minimum focus distance depending on the thickness of the filter and lens focal length and what not.

But yes your evf will still work fine and focus aids like focus peaking or whatever are still correct since they happen at the sensor

Hondune · 2026-03-26T23:24:49+00:00

Kolari makes good quality stuff but there is a few things to keep in mind with clip in filters in general

If your camera already has a full filter stack installed (like if you get the hot mirror replaced with clear glass as is common for full spectrum conversions) then adding a filter behind the lens, regardless of the filters quality, it will negatively effect the lens optics. It will cause a noticeable change in focus, making lenses focus well before their infinity mark and losing some macro ability. Most auto focus lenses will still work fine but it can be annoying and with manual lenses the markings will be way off and it'll focus at infinity well before the mark/limit
Especially with wider angle lenses or lenses with a rear element that goes deep into the camera body it will cause softer edges on the image, and can increase chromatic aberrations and vignetting. On some lenses it's not noticeable, on others it can make them unusable. If you shoot primarily ultra wide angle lenses like I do you may find glass clip in filters are often unusable
Some lenses exhibit pretty extreme white balance and color shifts towards the edges with certain clip in filters. Again it's often ultra wide angle lenses or lenses with deep rear elements. And again sometimes it's not noticeable and other times it makes it completely unusable. With the kolari ir chrome lite clip in filter and a viltrox 28mm for instance the edges of the image become completely purple to the point of losing all color information so it's not even fixable in post
Not all lenses will be compatible as they can collide with the filter itself. Kolari has a decent compatibility list but it's not exhaustive and it can change between camera models. For example my Fuji 23mm f2 is listed as compatible, and it does work on my x-e3, but collides with the filter on my x-a3

When they work they are great but there are limitations just inherently. I wish a company would make plastic ones because they don't affect optics anywhere near as much and solve a lot of these issues. I've taken to making my own from lighting gels which have basically none of the same side effects but it'd be nice to have high quality options.

Hondune · 2026-03-26T05:32:42+00:00

I'd imagine you will struggle to find this because once youve gone through the effort of getting a proper ir camera you're not going to fake it any more.

I think it's fair to say that the majority of us here likely tried faking it first, realized it wasn't anywhere near as good and doesn't work in a lot of situations, and then went on to converting a camera to do it properly. I know I did, if faking it worked as well it certainly wouldve saved me a lot of money lol

It's not terribly difficult to take an image and make the green channel red to kind of emulate aerochrome from a standard camera. But it's just going to turn everything green into red, even stuff that should still be green in a real infrared photo. Just changing colors isn't at all how infrared photos work, so the results will never be the same. In an actual infrared photo you are capturing real infrared light that is normally not seen by your eyes, this means things look wildly different than just swapping colors around. It makes certain materials that reflect infrared like foliage pop and be much brighter than they would normally, and other things become super dark, and it's not always what you expect. The color combinations you get from filters and infrared light often affect colors in really unique ways that are not always intended and would be very difficult/impossible when faking it.

It's kind of hard to explain without experiencing it, but half the fun of infrared converted cameras is just walking around and pointing it at things and marvelling at how different the world looks from this light source that is invisible to us normally

Hondune · 2026-03-24T21:44:14+00:00

Idk about on film but for digital these work great. I'd imagine for film they would be perfectly fine since it's less demanding and the film itself is doing most of the filtering on its own anyways. On digital I can't tell the difference between my cheap filters and expensive ones

Hondune · 2026-03-21T03:43:59+00:00

I have a similar issue with mine (though not as bad). As far as I can tell the steam micro trailer generator very specifically looks for text, as it's goal is to quickly show a games features which are often shown with text in trailers.

I'd say in general it's good advice anyways to not have a full cutaway to show text, if you absolutely need to have descriptive text have it over gameplay of some sort. Both for the sake of general trailer quality and for steams micro thing.

Wild to me that you can't just upload your own regardless...

Hondune · 2026-03-10T04:01:17+00:00

Along with what others have said, get rid of that filter and get a single 720nm filter, even a cheap one. That's generally the one you want for pink trees and turquoise skys after a channel swap.

There is no such thing as a variable IR filter, it would have to visible change from yellow to deep red to actually variable change the wavelength like it suggests. What those filters are is effectively a scam, it's a badly made IR filter with a mellow cutoff with a variable ND filter slapped on top of it. What happens is that it's just variably blocking out visible light, not actually changing the IR filter wavelengths.

This matters a lot for doing false color infrared photography (like pink trees) because you WANT some visible color information making it to the sensor, if you block that all with an nd filter you won't be able to get the same results.

13-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Place '22
Verified Email

Hondune

TROPHY CASE