Feature request: model export - texture count reduction?

[Bikerdude]

Would it possible to tweak or add to the model (.LWO and .ASE) export function the ability to reduce the amount of textures, or better still to export a single custom texture for the exported model..?

 

For example atm if we take a bunch of Springheel's modular models, or just random models and brushwork and export that collection to a single model there is X number of textures which as I understand it increases the draw call count by the number of textures used.

 

With Springheels modular models the texture count is lower due to the way he created them, due to the small amount of and similar textures used. But for maps like the one Im working on, I'm taking .ASE, .LWO and exiting brush/patch work and exporting to a single model.

[stumpy]

we need to keep the multitexture exporter version as I use that a lot and it would mess up a lot of my maps, so you would need them to add another version that only saves one texture for the model.

[LDAsh]

Wouldn't this also require writing a custom material script (entry) to use the new (atlased) texture? That's the only way it would decrease batches, from what I understand.

 

If it were possible and easy to code up, it would definitely be a powerful feature.

[duzenko]

You could put all in one texture and use a texture matrix for each part of it if I understand this discussion.

[peter_spy]

Usually you combine models in modeling software and arrange their faces in UV space there.

[stumpy]

the engine can already handle models with uv textures, cos I've done some in blender and used them in some maps, but blenders a bit of a pain in the rear to use.

 

but the other model exporters need to be kept as they are eg if you are turning a func_static house into a model then the multiple texture versions are needed, it will be hard to use textures from the dark mod combined into one texture, you just need to get someone to write an exporter to handle uv textures for those people with the skill to draw the uv textures so they don't look different from the same textures used in the mod.

Edited August 22, 2018 by stumpy

[peter_spy]

Technically, there's no difference between using tiled textures and unwrapping all faces in 0-1 texture space, these are just different methods of the same texture mapping function (simple projection mapping vs. unwrapping). But the question is similar to what OrbWeaver said on another occasion, is it worth it to replicate modeling software features in DR.

Edited August 22, 2018 by Judith

[Dragofer]

I recall a recent discussion in which it was said that it's not easily done to combine normal maps, as they have intrinsic properties beyond just the colours in their image (orientation?). It seems to be fine as long as they're designed to go together from the outset.

[Obsttorte]

Well, you can't simple add them to each other as they need to be normalized (as the name already implies). However, you can lineary interpolate between two normals, which would keep their properties, but this might not always leed to the desired effect.

 

The main problem is that how the normals should optimally be combined highly depends on the situation. If you blend a dirt texture with a stone one, you will probably not want the normal map of the dirt to be taken into consideration too much, as the surface bumpiness is mainly dominated by the stone surface, whereas the dirt just lies on top of it, at least if it is supposed to be a thin dirt layer. If the layer is sufficiently thick, though, the dirt normals should player a more important role. It's hard to think of an algorithm who decides upon that sufficiently.