Gallery Topic (post your favorite work, or WIP's)

[Sel]

I dont see how thats a better result......

[DaneO'Roo]

shrinking a texture just makes you LOSE detail.
SHRINKING does not ADD anything. at all.

painting textures at a resolution you're not going to use it at is just DUMB.
people used to do it, because they thought it gave them sub-pixel detail everyone knows thats bullshit thats why nobody does it anymore.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[LlamaMaster]

Ben Mathis:

True resolution vs. Double Size

When painting a texture, many times people will paint at two times the resolution, then size it down. Meaning if the final map is a 512x512, they will paint at 1024x1024. I recomend staying at true resolution whenever possible.

If you are just starting out at texturing, painting at the actual resolution is a good habbit to get into. There are many reasons for this. First and formost, is the time factor. You do not have to worry about any details that cannot fit into the end result map, because it IS the end result map. If the pixels hold it, it will show up in game (if the camera/player gets close enough) Secondly is how crisp your end result will be. I have said before, and Ill say again, you as the artist, want the control. any uniform application by a computer will end up looking piss poor compared to the same sort of effect applied by a skilled artist. Each pixel in the resized map is the result of the average of four pixels at the larger size. You can place single pixel highlights, as well as razor sharp single pixel seams and shadows. They will not be blurred to obscurance by photoshops algorithms.

Common reasons people argue for painting at double res:

But I can be messier/faster/scribblier and then size it down and it looks "right". This is not true, it only makes your mistakes less apparent. Their is a reason that art teachers tell you to "draw big" It is because it makes your mistakes apparent. If you cannot make it look right at the small res, you are not making it look right when you resize either. It is just that your mistakes become less apparent.

But I can get subpixel detail! Again, not true, there is no such thing. A pixel is a pixel is a pixel. You can have detail that is implied as smaller than a pixel, but it is just as reproducable at res, as it is double size, you just have to know how to do it. and it will read better because you did it at true res, than if you resized down. One particular thing that people like resizing for is hair. A good way to learn how to do implied sub pixel detail, is to actually resize something, and look to see what the pixels are doing that implies that thinner than a pixel detail. Once you learn these "rules" you can use them or adapt them for your needs, and be faster because you are painting them at res.

Again, if you are already fantastic at texturing, and you resize. By all means, continue doing it. It is, and always will be, the ingame results that count.

So yah, the only real reason is to blur out mistakes.

[DaneO'Roo]

SO it just a matter of style, you can spend hours painting a fantastic texture at full res, or if its just a quickly you can spend half the time, and just shrink it down a little giving you a bit better end result.

No one is, right, and no one is wrong.

That post coming from someone who doesn't paint textures, and this post coming from someone who does, I can say that is one of the single most retarded posts I've read in quite a while, Croccy.

It takes more time to paint a bigger texture, than a smaller one. If you half assed the detail on a "hi res" and hoped for shrinking to improve it, your not going to get any more detail on the lower res version. Your going to get a lower res, blurrier and undetailed piece of crap, which took you ages to make because you painted it at a stupid resolution to begin with. Basically, worse. The only thing you improved on was filesize. You lost in all other areas.

You paint at the resolution your going to use, so you KNOW what it's going to look like. What happens if you've got a texture budget, of 512 for a bitmap, and you paint the thing for AGES on a 2048, you shrink it down, and it looks like complete crap. You just wasted your time.

Logic people.


*e* oh shit Llama, someone deserves a spanking of + rep :awesome:

[SuperSunny]

I believe, that by looking at Dano's signature, and suddenly realizing his natural talent is painting textures, that there is no point in arguing with him.

Create your works at what you are going to use them. Don't make them any better, only to make them worse. You get the detail you aim for. It's exactly how you'd want it.

On a side note:



This screenie is a bit special, and it's not the same as the ones from the same old hallway.

In it, is pure dynamic lighting, ZERO lightmaps. It has a 128x128 squared cube-map on the walls, and the floor, that reflect the exact environment it's in, custom created. It also has a dynamic mirror. It uses a 1024x1024 sized bump-map and wall texture, which was created at 1024x1024, not 2048 and down-sized. And the game, well, it runs with less FPS loss than Damnination.

I think that's the max I can get, in my work-in-progress to obtain the best Halo can look. I don't know what else I can do. It has everything the game is capable of. Including particles. The rest is simply applying it, the best it can be applied, and releasing all the information so that everyone else can do the same to their own works. I feel satisfied. It's done.

[Con]

I think it's a little too bright at the end of that hallway considering that I can only see one light in the area.

[SuperSunny]

I think it's a little too bright at the end of that hallway considering that I can only see one light in the area.

Which end? The darker end is visible because of reflection brightness/cave-lights. The super bright end has a multitude of lens flares placed along it. The single light is supposed to be powerful and contrasting. It's not supposed to be the usual generic light, but a single one which is meant to be strong.

[Con]

I mean it looks TOO strong for a single light. Maybe a strip of more lights to help the brightness make sense?

[Kalub]

Dano, I paint things, not textures. But, I'm not claiming to be a god at it.

" Common reasons people argue for painting at double res:

But I can be messier/faster/scribblier and then size it down and it looks "right". This is not true, it only makes your mistakes less apparent. Their is a reason that art teachers tell you to "draw big" It is because it makes your mistakes apparent. If you cannot make it look right at the small res, you are not making it look right when you resize either. It is just that your mistakes become less apparent. " Isn't this what I was saying? Its what I thought I was.

[Roostervier]

If you're serious, I'm pretty sure that statement is trying to discourage resing down the texture. It isn't fighting for its (down resing) defense.