Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Custom Skins => Topic started by: Kev367th on November 22, 2004, 08:56:41 AM
-
A few suggestions that maybe HTC could implement -
1) By default skins should be non-specular (shiny).
2) Go back to the old 2 files for skins.
Noticed with the B24 now that we are working with 1 file only it is effectively reducing the detail by half.
Would suggest we keep the 'old' method of 1 file for wings, other for everything else.
This will allow us to keep the level of detail we current experience with the older models.
Anything else people can think of?
-
also can we have the art work easierr to remove on some of the skins.
-
We had to go to one exterior texture because using the old method made us go over the texture limit.
We eventually are planning to implement a shiney/not shiney flag for skinners somehow.
-
Texture limit?
Could you exapnd a little please if you have time.
Tkx
-
1) I would like to know the next couple of planes scheduled for renovation/rework. I don't want to spend alot of time doing a skin only to learn later that the skin will shortly be made obsolete.
2) This is a small item, but in the skin selection dropdown, I'd like to see FG/FS information for the default skins as well - since we have it for all the other skins we should have it for the defaults.
-
Oboe,
Pyro said the P-38 was going to be renovated in v2.02.
-
Originally posted by SUPERFLY
We had to go to one exterior texture because using the old method made us go over the texture limit.
We eventually are planning to implement a shiney/not shiney flag for skinners somehow.
Superfly, do I understand it correctly that the flag will mean "shiny on" and "shiny off" for the entire model? Most of the shiny planes have many areas that are not... any chance we could use that never-used bump channel as a specularity channel?
-
Superfly -
If we have a "texture limit" and since it's been reduced, will some of the other things, such as gauge bezels, ammo counter frames, beacons, and such be able to be changed if doing an interior reskin?
I would love to see a specularity layer if possible - would look nice on those p51bs - with the OD and natural metal..as well as opening all sorts of paint svhemes that would look nice.
-
Originally posted by SUPERFLY
We had to go to one exterior texture because using the old method made us go over the texture limit.
We eventually are planning to implement a shiney/not shiney flag for skinners somehow.
OK, I'm going to demonstrate my ignorance here but I hate to see the level of detail go down.
You could maintain the texture count, keep the current memory size, and almost keep the level of detail by changing the size of the bit map to 2048 x 1024. If the purpose of going to the smaller skins isn’t to increase the game performance by reducing memory requirements, then wouldn’t that have all of the same advantages?
I just hate to see the level of detail drop to 25% of current values because I don't think the B-24 looks good at this level of detail. You did a great job considering the handicap. I believe it's going to be very limiting going forward.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Oboe,
Pyro said the P-38 was going to be renovated in v2.02.
My bad, yep I mean the one AFTER the P-38. I know about that one, and am excited to see a new model coming out for it. I was working on a few '38 skins and sent them in 'as is' when I heard they would be obsolete with the next version. If they get into the game for a while great, if not, fine, but in any case I'd like to avoid skinning the next plane to be reworked until after its been completed.
-
i would like voids available..
-
Texture limit:
In other words, the amount of memory required to be used on the video card was being exceeded for our minimum system requirements. Making a bigger texture than 1024x1024 would most likely break it as well. You have to consider older vid cards/systems.
Upcoming remodels:
I have no idea what will be the next remodeled planes. This is something Pyro decides, and it is usually just after we have released a new version. It's one of those things where I don't know until we get there. I'm not scheduled to do a revamp of a model for this version right now. I am currently doing FX work with Sudz, and Nate is working on the P38.
Shiney/Unshiney:
We still haven't come up with an absolute method for this yet. It will be set to a specific material on the plane which can be changed. I'm not sure if we're going to allow more than one material to be changed. All this has yet to be determined.
-
Thanks for the update, Superfly. :)
-
texture size and numbers limit-
OK the reason makes sense, but the logic escapes me.
You take a huge leap forward by enabling user skins, then a step back by effectively halfing the size and therefore the detail.
Therefore as planes are remodelled the quality should still be there but the details can be nowhere near what we currently have/expect.
Sure you have to support older cards but there is an option to disable skins in AH2 or use lower skin resolutions.
Could maybe specify on the website minimum specs for skin enabled/disabled.
I am surprised that the minimum requirements for AH2 is not that different from AH1 considering the huge differences. Does anyone out there actually still use a 32mb vid card for gaming?
I would guess the minimum used is now probably 64mb. I haven't seen a gaming card with 32mb on it for a long time.
I am sure most of us skinners prefer the 'old' 2 file skin layout as it allows us to go to town on the little things, things that will be missing from the 'new' layout due to its limited area.
I would ask that you revisit the number of files or the bmp size and allow us to continue to provide you with high quality detailed skins.
Seems strange that in 2.02 we'll be getting all the lovely eye candy but you reduce the amount of detail possible in the new models by half.
Below is a comparison, not hard to work out which one is on half the area.
(http://www.cyberonic.net/~kreed/tifftest.jpg)
Thanks for your time.
-
Well, I use one of those 32 meg gForce cards and I still want the larger file sizes so I can make decent looking skins. I'm probably one of the few skiners still runing at 128 texture size. :o Just because I can't see all the detail in-game right now doesn't mean I won't eventually get around to upgrading my video card and I'd like to see all the nice work and details when I do. Otherwise, why bother upgrading my card.
But that's just me and my request.
-
Kev, I understand where you're coming from, and please don't take this as anything other than constructive... but the example that you are showing is really not helping you prove any point.
The *only* detail that you've increased between the two images is the rivet detail, and IMO it's grossly overdone and unrealistic. Sure, it looks kinda cool, but that's not what we should be chasing, especially if we're hitting the boundaries of texture limits.
The places where higher resolution would really matter (like the crispness of the "XMM" and "RB8--" text) have been lost on both images. Look how blurry the text edges are; why have high-resolution blurriness?
The truth is that good skinning is not so much about the number of pixels you use, but what you do with the pixels you have. You can do amazing amounts of detail with limited real estate, it's just a matter of using good technique. And if the trade-off of having less area-per-part means we'll get every surface skinnable (no more mirroring finally!) then that is a HUGE bonus.
[edit: Think of it this way if it helps... you can put 16 old AH1 skins onto the area of a single AH2 skin. Sixteen! We will still make out in the deal, and AH2 skins will STILL be bigger than IL-2 skins.]
Just my 2 cents, FWIW. :)
-
Originally posted by Dux
[edit: Think of it this way if it helps... you can put 16 old AH1 skins onto the area of a single AH2 skin. Sixteen! We will still make out in the deal, and AH2 skins will STILL be bigger than IL-2 skins.]
Just my 2 cents, FWIW. :)
lol he is limited by skin size?
what should we say when was only 256x256, lol
-
Originally posted by Dux
[edit: Think of it this way if it helps... you can put 16 old AH1 skins onto the area of a single AH2 skin. Sixteen! We will still make out in the deal, and AH2 skins will STILL be bigger than IL-2 skins.]
I'd agree with most of your post until this part, there are some exceptions, take a look at the new B-24 skin and compare it to the Lanc, B-26 and B-17 skin realestate.
Historically accurate nose art on the bombers was one of the things I was looking forward to but I think it will be very limited at the new B-24 skin size, which is a shame because of all that's available. Oh well, we'll just have to skin the "no name" planes.
-
That's a really good point, Easyscor... perhaps for bomber noseart they could return to the old "markings_A.bmp" technique, since noseart seems to almost always be in the same place. If you didn't want the noseart file, you could just black out the alpha. Then the whole plane skin wouldn't be pushed over the top for the sake of a higher-res noseart.
btw, Kev, I'm not singling you out here, and I want to be sure you know where I'm coming from. I love the Mossie skins you've done, and I LOVE the Coastal Command Liberator. You should give yourself more credit, because the quality of your skins comes from you, and not the size of the file. That's really the only point I'm trying to make. :)
-
No problem Dux.
Noseart is a prime exmaple though, and I am sure we will run across more limitations with only half the area to work with.
My only point was with half the area to work with, detail will suffer, it's unavoidable.
As I said the reason for it is sound, it's the logic that escapes me.
As there is an option to turn skins off, I don't see why we should be limited to 1 1024x1024 file.
It would be like removing or toning down all the new eye candy to support older cards even though there are options to do that yourself in the game.
DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
-
This has nothing to do with skins being on or off. It is a global issue for the entire game. If we do all the default skins with 2 1024 outer skins along with the 3 interior skins, it breaks the limit. That's 5 1024 textures for just one plane.
-
Ahh..got ya.
Never thought about the interior ones.
Couldn't you do the interior ones at 512x512 or leave them at 256x256, that way you could still have the 2 exterior at 1024x1024 and still save memory.
Thanks for taking the time to explain.
-
eek - interior at 256?
I'd rather have interior and upper wing surfaces at 1024 - since those are what you see the most - and have the rest of the plane at a lower resolution (undersurfaces / fuselage). I've noticed lately that the resolution drops now when you get a certain distance away from the planes. I'm not sure what the distance is, (guess-timate d4-500) but you can tell offline zooming in/out.
-
HTC,
How about thinking in pixel density – number of pixels per some unit such as pixels per inch or pixels per square foot – instead of texture size?
I have my Max Texture Size set to 128 in an attempt to improve frame rate. Small planes, like fighters, don't look that bad. I'm never close enough to see the rivets anyway. But having only 128 pixels stretched over a bomber looks hideous. I agree with Waffle that the interiors and upper wing surfaces – any surface you can see from the cockpit – should have more detail (higher pixel density). You can get that by dedicating more of the texture area to those surfaces. Then if you really want to get the most out of your textures you have to consider the distance the surfaces is from the eye-point. Wing roots get more detail than the wing tips. Inboard engines get more detail than the outboards. Talk about a skinner's nightmare! Suddenly you have another reason for taking that Hyperbolic Geometry course in college.
To sum it up, do you have to treat all the planes the same irregardless of their size? Is it an option to have the bombers with two 1024 outer skins and fighters having only one 1024 outer skin? Or limit the bombers to one 1024 and the fighters to two 512s?
MachNix
-
This is a ta152 that I've been messing around with -
The screenshots are taken with the Fuselage and lower surfaces(TA152.bmp) at 512x512. The upper wing(TA1522.bmp) is at 1024. The Cockpit is done in 1024(190CK.bmp, 190CK2.bmp, and TA152CK.bm.). The wheels and misc file (190x.bmp) were dropped to 256 from 512. Granted the Ta152 is using 3 cockpit texture maps at 1024x1024, but most planes should be able to use only 2 1024x1024bmp for cockpits.
So you're looking at (3) 1024x1024.bmp. upper wings / cpit
and (1) 512x512.bmp fuse/lower surfaces and one 256x256.bmp for the geaqr/wheels, ect..
Almost a middle ground between the (2) 1024s as current models and the (5) 1024s.
All in all when you're shooting at something 512x512bmp is fine. But when you're inside the 1024x1024 makes all the difference in the world.
(http://www.dangreve.com/ahss2.gif)
(http://www.dangreve.com/ahss3.gif)
(http://www.dangreve.com/ahss0.gif)
(http://www.dangreve.com/ahss4.gif)