Overkill?

[FireCrack]

If you only texture 2 or 3 "segments" you should be able to repeat the texture for other segments and keep the texture size down.

ah, but they are all different sizes, and have different facet counts... if that would only work...

It can still work, all you have to do is apply the texture slightly differently.

[LathanStanley]

If you only texture 2 or 3 "segments" you should be able to repeat the texture for other segments and keep the texture size down.

ah, but they are all different sizes, and have different facet counts... if that would only work...

It can still work, all you have to do is apply the texture slightly differently.

I know exactly what you are saying to do...

I'm a perfectionish however... maybe I can work something out on the other models... but I refuse to repeat faces on the same model when they have their oen texture space... its like cheating to me...

[GrOuNd_ZeRo]

p2p ftw...

OMFG HAXXOR :O!


I'M CALLING THE INTERNET POLICE ON YOU!!!

LMAO...funny.

Not a bad suggestion Min3mat, not that I would do such a vile thing though

[SinbadEV]

I would just like to point out yet again, that those models are looking freaking hot and LathanStanley is a wikid awsome person that we can all envy....

[FireCrack]

ah, but they are all different sizes, and have different facet counts... if that would only work...

It can still work, all you have to do is apply the texture slightly differently.

I know exactly what you are saying to do...

I'm a perfectionish however... maybe I can work something out on the other models... but I refuse to repeat faces on the same model when they have their oen texture space... its like cheating to me...

No i'd never recomend that. What you should do is get them to use the same texture space, but scale the UV's differently.

[LathanStanley]

stacking the UV's isn't much better.. its still cheating the texture.. but it does save filespace and texturespace....

but I have to work with sqares and hex squares at that...


meaning, I have choices of:

8x8
16x16
32x32
64x64
128x128
256x256
512x512
1024x1024
2048x2048
.... and so on... there is no "half" steps.. they have to double each time...

now... I had a choice of 256x256 with UBER crammed textures... lol.. it'd look pretty shitty compared to now.. with the only REAL benefit of less hours of work... or 512x512 with a very light performance strain.. (only IF lots of these show up in the same spot...) and have VERY VERY nice detailed texture that'll make you go "woo", with just added work...

and I'd rather not be 100% lazy...

[FireCrack]

Powers of two.

How big is this thing? I'm taking it to be fairly small, so mabye you are justifying a bigger texture with it's size.

[LathanStanley]

I was thinking kroggy tall.. maybe a tad bigger... people like big features for whatever reason...

the tex can ALWAYS be scaled down, if its ruidiclious....

or if the map author wants them small and very common.. IE if he wants to make them trees.. he can chop the texture to a 64x64 and make them tree height... he's just gonna have ALOT of facets to watch out for...

or if he wants them pretty spread about and not too detailed and big.. make it 128 or 256 and just go nuts..

but if he wants them BIG and with LOTS of detail... keep em as-is.. or scale em up even... thats the effect I'm TRYING to be able to do with my features... give them some variance if they want to...

hell.. he could make a copy of everything, do some small, some big, or as many varying degrees in-between as the author wants to.. hell.. make MORE copies and run some of them rotated in different directions even...

[FireCrack]

Ah, makes much more sense, i thaught they were going to be about as tall as the TA trees.

[LathanStanley]

ehheehehe ok, for you UBER nerds like me... that know what stereoscopic imaging is...

check it

do that retarted cross-eyed trick and this thing is 3D, I promise



for the rest of you... its just an update..

[Maelstrom]

That is a damn fine piece of work. The stereoscopic view just makes it brilliant. Except your missing some textures at the top

[LathanStanley]

its not done yet...

[FireCrack]

Gah, it's too big an image, i cant make it 3d like!

[SinbadEV]

I was under the impression that if all the units were using the same texture that the texture was only loaded in memory one time... so aiming at 512x512 seems reasonable enough

[SinbadEV]

Gah, it's too big an image, i cant make it 3d like!

yeah... it's too early for my eyes to 3d right... I set the resolution on my monitor to maximum and then walked across the room and managed to get it... then came back to the computer and was able to see it right... except it's out of focus because my eyes don't start working right for a few hours after I wake up anymore...

[LathanStanley]

on 1024x768 it only takes about 95% of the screen on IE...

I dunno what you guys are whining about... isn't that the standard resolution anymore??

I can make it work at an easy ~20 inches from the screen... normal sitting distance...

[Machiosabre]

stereoscopic imaging that isn't naked ladies?! this is insanity!

[FizWizz]

Gah, it's too big an image, i cant make it 3d like!

yeah... it's too early for my eyes to 3d right... I set the resolution on my monitor to maximum and then walked across the room and managed to get it... then came back to the computer and was able to see it right... except it's out of focus because my eyes don't start working right for a few hours after I wake up anymore...

You're doing it wrong, you're trying to unfocus your eyes to make it work, what you have to do is Cross your eyes. It took me about fifteen seconds to 'focus' on it correctly.

stereoscopic imaging that isn't naked ladies?! this is insanity!

I've never heard of that before, links?

[Machiosabre]

I don't think thats allowed

[SinbadEV]

nonono... I know how to do it... it was just too early... I tried again now and got it in like 3 seconds... the unfocussing is basically step 1 that allows some people to cross their eyes properly in the first place...