The Texture Chopping Block

[Tels]

It looks like this ran aground. Can we have this branch created now? (Well, not "NOW!" because there's nothing to put there yet, but relatively speaking.)

 

Creating the branch would be easy. Going through the textures and making them better, deleting them etc. will be the big work, tho. But I think it will totally be worth it So, how can I help you?

[SneaksieDave]

I guess it would be a slow process done over time, as there's no real rush for it. The intent of this (or whichever) thread is just that we say 'hey this texture is great, or this one sucks, or this one needs fixing, or here's what we're missing...' Basically anyone should bring up any such comments they want, and everyone should express their opinions on it. One by one or ten by ten.

 

I'm not sure "rules" or whatever was originally imagined for this process are necessary; we can just take it as it comes. It started off with trying to get things rolling with one of my most disliked textures in the mod, but then we paused at the creation of a repository to house the rejected textures.

 

See a texture which stands out in one of the ways above? Start a discussion about it.

[Dram]

I totally agree with removing really bad textures, but please, a replacement should be put in its place - there's nothing worse then going to edit your map when suddenly textures are missing etc. I'm sure you understand.

 

I think the best approach is to replace old textures with better versions, rather then remove altogether.

[HappyCheeze]

I totally agree with removing really bad textures, but please, a replacement should be put in its place - there's nothing worse then going to edit your map when suddenly textures are missing etc. I'm sure you understand.

 

I think the best approach is to replace old textures with better versions, rather then remove altogether.

 

I agree.

 

[SneaksieDave]

Wow looking through this as I wait for SVN to ever finish, this is indeed a very big task. If it's up to one person it'll never get done, so if anything sticks out to anyone, please speak up. Textures need to be evaluated for quality, if they can be fixed or should be ditched and replaced, figure out what is needed for sets, etc. On top of that, I have half a dozen folders (not images, folders) full of submissions from different authors over the years to consider, several free sites with good stuff, and just about every tex on masterbuilderstore.com is very impressive, so we need to comb that too.

 

So we definitely can give the repository a major overhaul, but it's going to be a task for sure. And we have to commit to accepting only the best (provided enough exists to meet the needs). Mediocrity brings the mod down. By contrast, textures like that ivy one in HC's maze, or that fat brown stone wall I love by I think capela but I can't access right now because friggin SVN is still updating*, or Renzatic's stone shown today, or so many of them out there just waiting, will beautify the mod beyond description. It is completely unnecessary to settle for anything less than great anymore.

 

 

Aside: I recently played through Sliptip's Ashen Age and it's simply a jaw dropper for textures. I believe it's a lot of stuff from mayang and other such sites. They look great in the mission, even compared to TDM. Everything is textured so well and with so much care. Even his stair fronts are impressive. Mmmm... stair fronts. Wish he'd finish his current diversion and get over here already.

 

 

Edit: *This one! Oh dear god. (and yes, SVN finished with no probs yay!)

[Tels]

I agree.

 

 

Agree.

[Tels]

The first texture(s) we should overhaul are the green/brown wood ones used commonly for beams. Don't get the me wrong, esp. the greenish color one is spot on (the reddish seems to be a bit to reddish brown) and they look like real old weathered beams.

 

However, the resolution is way too low:

 

 

With like double the resolution it wouldn't stick out that bad anymore. I think the normalmap is also too weak. Since the same diffuse is used by at least 3 textures, that would help a bit.

[OrbWeaver]

Since there was criticism of the interlocking_angled_grey brick texture being too clean and shiny, here is an example of what I mean by weathering the texture:

 

 

I'm not much of a texture artist and this could certainly do with some improvement, but it should demonstrate how textures like this might be made to look less "computer-perfect".

[Tels]

Since there was criticism of the interlocking_angled_grey brick texture being too clean and shiny, here is an example of what I mean by weathering the texture:

 

I'm not much of a texture artist and this could certainly do with some improvement, but it should demonstrate how textures like this might be made to look less "computer-perfect".

 

That looks actually great! Only criticism I have is that it is now a bit dark, and that changes the overall impression of the scenes a bit. We probably need one version like yours, and a little bit more bright/slightly less worn for the "rich mansion/rich church with newly put in floor" type.

 

Edit: Actually, if the "scratches" are a overlay with alpha, we can just make two material shaders using the same diffuse and a "blend filter" stage. Gives us best of both.

 

(Actually, jdude is right, he said they cleaned the church, and maybe the next time we can make that two sections, one with the old texture, one with the new, and a few lose blocks and a note from the priest to the workers, they are lazy bastards and should finish the floor before the bishop comes

[SneaksieDave]

I like it, though the "undulating" of it seems a bit too strong. Some decay of course, but it almost seems to "wave uniformly", if you know what I mean?

 

I meant also to chime back in on one point raised above that I forgot to: I don't think I agree with the notion that things should only be replaced, and nothing removed. Perhaps it is semantics though (because if things are added, and things removed, then technically, they're being replaced I guess). Reason is, a quick search of for instance masterbuilderstore.com shows that there are a bunch of good stones we can add. At the same time, we have many already. So my point would be, the poor ones can definitely simply leave and the good ones added. So it's not strictly a "replace" but there's no need, as the bad is outnumbered at this point. The really bad textures are simply making the memory demands higher, DarkRadiant load slower, the mod size larger, etc. Nothing but useless bloat. There's greatness to be had.

[OrbWeaver]

I like it, though the "undulating" of it seems a bit too strong. Some decay of course, but it almost seems to "wave uniformly", if you know what I mean?

 

I think that's because it's only a 512 texture, which means that a single block takes up about half the size of that carpet. It was just a quick demo; if I was going to (attempt to) remake it properly I would start with a 3D model rendered at 1024x1024 as a normalmap.

[Arcturus]

The first texture(s) we should overhaul are the green/brown wood ones used commonly for beams. Don't get the me wrong, esp. the greenish color one is spot on (the reddish seems to be a bit to reddish brown) and they look like real old weathered beams.

 

I think have something similar:

 

[Tels]

I think have something similar:

 

 

Yes, I think that could replace the diffuse. Should I try it, or do you want to have a go at it? (You are the better artist

[Baddcog]

I actually really like the floor tex that got a complaint. I think we should keep it as is. Maybe the spec needs minimized a bit but that's all.

 

Adding a dirty version would be good too. Honestly though it's a really good tex that only needs a slight tweak in the material file. Obviously the person who wrote that doesn't understand the material file thing.

 

The wood beam I think are fine. But in that pic I think it's a matter of scale used in the mission.

[Arcturus]

Yes, I think that could replace the diffuse. Should I try it, or do you want to have a go at it? (You are the better artist

 

I'll do it

[SneaksieDave]

Indeed I like that floor as well. That guy didn't like it, oh well.

[Tels]

Indeed I like that floor as well. That guy didn't like it, oh well.

 

As I said, tone down the specular a bit, and it can stay. The new, scratched one looks really good, too. Orbweaver, could you please commit it?

[Arcturus]

Let's just start with simply removing the worst textures. There are some that probably haven't been used so far in any map. We can simply throw them away. My first proposition is:

stone\cobblestones\flagstones06_granite

[SneaksieDave]

Let's just start with simply removing the worst textures. There are some that probably haven't been used so far in any map. We can simply throw them away. My first proposition is:

stone\cobblestones\flagstones06_granite

I'm not a big fan of that one either. It needs either a much better normal map, or to be removed completely. Opinions, all? (image below)

 

---------

 

I'll try to move the branching discussion above about new textures to a new thread suited to that purpose... fingers crossed. We can cross link between the two threads, but let's try to keep this one about texture retirement and the other about texture additions.

 

Edit: well it mostly worked. The posts are there, but I couldn't put an intro post as first position. :-/

http://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?s=&am...st&p=168941

[SneaksieDave]

To follow Arcturus' nomination, I will re-nominate my first mention from page 1 just for completeness, which seemed like one to go as well. (Yes they're both this poor; they might be salvageable with a lot of work, but the intent of this thread is to keep a clear mind and ask: why bother, when other really good textures are available?)

 

stone/brick/grey_protruding_bricks (that is NOT a shadow -- it's in the diffuse)

[Springheel]

This one! Oh dear god. (and yes, SVN finished with no probs yay!)

 

What's wrong with that one?

 

I don't think I agree with the notion that things should only be replaced, and nothing removed. Perhaps it is semantics though (because if things are added, and things removed, then technically, they're being replaced I guess).

 

I think the concern is that anyone who happens to be using a deleted texture then goes back to their map to find dozens of black brushes, which is annoying. It would certainly be nice to replace textures that are deleted with new textures of the same name, but I'm not sure how practical that is.

 

stone/brick/grey_protruding_bricks (that is NOT a shadow -- it's in the diffuse)

 

It's very hard to tell just from screenshots how good they are--it's hard to tell what comes from the lighting, the normalmap, etc.

[SneaksieDave]

No, see above, that one is one of my most beloved! I was giving examples of great textures, and why we don't have to settle for crappy ones anymore. Blown up to double normal size, that one makes fat nasty crumbly dirty awesome looking stones perfect for... well maybe everyone will see some day.

[Dram]

To follow Arcturus' nomination, I will re-nominate my first mention from page 1 just for completeness, which seemed like one to go as well. (Yes they're both this poor; they might be salvageable with a lot of work, but the intent of this thread is to keep a clear mind and ask: why bother, when other really good textures are available?)

 

stone/brick/grey_protruding_bricks (that is NOT a shadow -- it's in the diffuse)

 

Here is where it starts to become problematic. This texture, for example is one I use in Letterford manor for the window frame parts. If it is replaced by a texture which does not match it almost exactly (especially in block numbers and spacing) then I'd have to go and re-align every window-frame texture, which is really a pain, as I'm sure you understand Sneaks.

 

I am all for replacing textures like dirt etc with better versions, as they have no specific marks etc that mappers might use on smaller objects etc. But, for the more complex textures such as these stone blocks, replacements would have to match almost exactly in spacing, size of blocks, and marks (eg the rocky inlay of the blocks).

 

Don't get me wrong Sneaks- I agree with you, just want to avoid stepping on others' toes, if you know what I mean.

[SneaksieDave]

Dram: would you mind providing a screenshot of how it's used? Maybe it'll help influence the decision. I agree it would suck to have a texture you're using removed, but it's otherwise just a really poor texture. Would some of the marbles (featureless and smooth) serve?

 

Anyone have any other feedback on these? Nom(nom nom)inations never seem to get much attention it seems, and it's probably not a good idea to start removing stuff based on two votes.

[Dram]

Dram: would you mind providing a screenshot of how it's used? Maybe it'll help influence the decision. I agree it would suck to have a texture you're using removed, but it's otherwise just a really poor texture. Would some of the marbles (featureless and smooth) serve?

 

Anyone have any other feedback on these? Nom(nom nom)inations never seem to get much attention it seems, and it's probably not a good idea to start removing stuff based on two votes.

 

Sure, but let me do this tomorrow, I'm barely holding my eyes open at this point, so I'll pop a screenie up tomorrow ok?

 

Night.