Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

FPSC Classic Models and Media / Resolution Discussion

Author
Message
KeithC
Senior Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 03:24
I had heard some people talking about the difference between 512x512 and 1024x1024 resolutions with game models. so I decided to do a little test for myself. I also wanted to see if increasing the dharpness of the texture would have an effect on the grains in the wood, and the way the texture 'sticks out'.

-Keith

"Some people are only alive because it's illegal to kill them".

Attachments

Login to view attachments
transient
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2005
Location: Australia Zoo
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 03:57
Be careful with sharpening as you can easily get artifacts (you can see them a bit in this render).

I think you've proved there's no difference at this resolution.

instinct is more valuable than intelligence.....
KeithC
Senior Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 04:03
Yep, that's pretty much what I came up with. I was planning on using 512x512 for textures in my upcoming pack, but I'm wondering if I should do the textures in 1024x1024 (since FPSC will resize it anyways) in the event that FPSC eventually utilizes it.

Yeah, I think I'll stay away from the 'sharpen more' button when doing these.

-Keith

"Some people are only alive because it's illegal to kill them".
Rockdrala
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 09:27
If you will look at the original 512 with no sharpness (circled in point A you will see a tad bit of bluriness, its small and hard to notice but if look closely you can see the fogginess of texture.

If you look at point B you can see the sharpen feature has caused the pixels to cause small dots along the seam (ripping)

If you look at point C it has good texture with no ripping and strong reflection on it as well. The fogginess is minimal and the details are more encased into the box becuase when you shrink 1024 you have more room to work with detail that is shrunk down into 512.

I wish you would have put more light on the 1024 boxes so i can point the detail a lil more, they are in the shadows of the pic...

Those who fly low hurt least when they fall...

Attachments

Login to view attachments
bond1
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location:
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 10:07 Edited at: 27th Dec 2005 10:09
Keith, I would keep it at 512 if I were you, its good to start out with high resolution textures though when creating them.

But personally I think its better practice to resize them in photoshop rather than letting a game engine resize them. Photoshop has sophisticated filtering and antialiasing to produce the best aesthetic result when resizing. I'm sure FPSC does a hack job when resizing textures.

But, do whatever looks best to you. And keep those 1024 textures just in case FPSC can ever use them.
Rockdrala
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Dec 2005
Location:
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 12:27 Edited at: 27th Dec 2005 12:28
your right about that, fpsc isnt going to be the best thing to resize them with, using fpsc would cause some qaulity and detail loss

Those who fly low hurt least when they fall...
KeithC
Senior Moderator
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Oct 2005
Location: Michigan
Posted: 27th Dec 2005 17:01
I'll just do both, then when I put the pack together for sale, I'll include all the 1024x1024 in a separate file for people. That should cover all the bases.

-Keith

"Some people are only alive because it's illegal to kill them".

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-05-09 02:42:41
Your offset time is: 2024-05-09 02:42:41