LarryG on 25/10/2012 at 18:20
This has no texturing. The thing is that terra cotta tile has surface roughness. It is not a polished tile.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1439[/ATTACH]
I'll try taking a surface texture from something more like this:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1440[/ATTACH]
ZylonBane on 25/10/2012 at 18:34
Terra cotta is naturally reddish-brown. To make it blue, my admittedly very limited knowledge of the subject is that it would have to be painted (unlikely for a floor tile) or glazed, which would elminate surface roughness... as would simply being walked on for decades.
Now (
http://www.solarantiquetiles.com/ShowCategory.asp?cid=1) this looks like a handy site!
Nameless Voice on 25/10/2012 at 19:04
Quote Posted by Necrobob
I'm very partial to an extremely crisp look, that's true.
I should note that while I've got these textures exactly where I want them personally, that doesn't mean I'd have anything against anyone else tweaking the textures I post here, in case noone makes more "neutral" replacements of them from scratch.
I was gonna post my window textures next. Since this is the canon pack, which version of that one window with the dark bit at the bottom should I post?
Also, would you mind sharing the .psd files (assuming they're made in Photoshop?) In case someone wants to try to make less-sharp variations?
Windows textures.... window textures... I'm torn between authenticity (curtains pressed between screens of glass) and not looking silly (removing the dark area at the bottom.)
Vae on 25/10/2012 at 19:27
NV, there is no shade pressed between two pieces of glass...that was a misperception. The dark area at the bottom is meant to be a cabinet or some other object, because it blocks the light. It wasn't a blue shade, that is just the ambient star/moonlight.
Nameless Voice on 25/10/2012 at 19:29
Then there's a cabinet squished between two sheets of glass, since the same section is blocked on both the inside and the outside of the same window!
Nameless Voice on 25/10/2012 at 19:38
Object textures are always based on the UV mapping in the object, so I seriously doubt they will care about the terrain_scale setting. I didn't test it, but I can't logically think of a way that it would make sense for it to work - what would the engine do, chop off the top-left corner only and use that?
Which raised the bigger issue, that we can't really use 2x2 variants of textures without potentially breaking objects (such as pressure plates) which use those terrain textures via txtrepl.
In this particular case, it's not a huge deal (in fact, it's a
bonus, since the tiles on that object are double-sized compared to the other tiles), but I could see it potentially being an issue in other OMs, or FMs.
Renzatic on 25/10/2012 at 19:40
Quote Posted by Necrobob
I'm very partial to an extremely crisp look, that's true.
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Well, just bear in mind that this is Thief, not Painkiller. Sharpening doesn't add detail, it destroys it.
Bob, if you're using PS, I suggest trying out a high pass overlay. It's your non-destructive best of both worlds option.
It's what it literally sounds like. Take a copy of your base texture and put it at the top of the layer stack. Set your layer blend to overlay, then hit up Filter/Other/High Pass. Play around with the slider until it's as sharp as you like. Unlike using a sharpen filter, it's not effecting your original by adding noise and highlights to the edges. It's taking what's already there and enhancing it. If you find it's too sharp later, you can delete it and do it all over again, or play with the opacity slider to soften it up.
If you want an example, the original is on the left, the high pass overlay on the right.
Inline Image:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3018396/bookcase_default.jpgInline Image:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3018396/bookcase_sharp.jpgIt gives about the same results as a sharpen filter, but I'm not stuck with any permanent changes to my base. I can go back later and edit if I need to.
Vae on 25/10/2012 at 19:51
Cobwebs are looking better...Keep going...:thumb:
Quote Posted by Nameless Voice
Then there's a cabinet squished between two sheets of glass, since the same section is blocked on both the inside and the outside of the same window!
What likely happened, is that this was first conceived as an exterior window view, with two variations, one fire-lit and one faintly moon-lit...Later on, they realized the moon-lit version could be used as an interior window, because the same moonlight worked when looking out from inside. They either overlooked the inconsistency with the cabinet being on the outside, or were simply too rushed and thought no one would notice.
Inline Image:
http://i64.photobucket.com/albums/h161/DasMustardman/Win17oct1_zpsc211a60b.jpgNameless Voice on 25/10/2012 at 20:09
I realise that, but it still doesn't really help us with our high-res replacements.
ZylonBane on 25/10/2012 at 20:12
Quote Posted by Vae
It wasn't a blue shade, that is just the ambient star/moonlight.
Magically turning clear glass to opaque and blue? :weird:
How are you even thinking that a cabinet
inside the window would influence reflective effects on the
outside of the glass?
