bukary on 9/5/2005 at 10:53
Thank you, Crispy! :thumb:
If anyone cares to download it, could you tell me if you also have such strange normal map artifacts?
Ziemanskye on 9/5/2005 at 13:30
You've probably already seen this, but it's the not so scientific thing I was going by with the dxt compression thing (
http://udn.epicgames.com/Two/TextureComparison) http://udn.epicgames.com/Two/TextureComparison.
Otherwise, I find myself slightly horrified that you seem to be taking a regular diffuse texture and trying to turn it into a normal map... Maybe it works out okay, it's been a while since I looked for tools for it. When I did most of them either wanted a regular grayscale bumpmap to convert into a normal bump map, or they wanted a low poly UV mapped model and a high poly model to 'bake' the normals out of.
And after a quick poke about in PaintShop, it seems that the original diffuse texture has the banding in it too, you just can't usually see it because of the patterns on the bricks.
I know this doesn't really help, but I thought you might at least appreciate where the thought came from.
bukary on 9/5/2005 at 13:54
Quote Posted by Ziemanskye
You've probably already seen this, but it's the not so scientific thing I was going by with the dxt compression thing (
http://udn.epicgames.com/Two/TextureComparison) http://udn.epicgames.com/Two/TextureComparison.
Otherwise, I find myself slightly horrified that you seem to be taking a regular diffuse texture and trying to turn it into a normal map... Maybe it works out okay, it's been a while since I looked for tools for it. When I did most of them either wanted a regular grayscale bumpmap to convert into a normal bump map, or they wanted a low poly UV mapped model and a high poly model to 'bake' the normals out of.
And after a quick poke about in PaintShop, it seems that the original diffuse texture has the banding in it too, you just can't usually see it because of the patterns on the bricks.
I know this doesn't really help, but I thought you might at least appreciate where the thought came from.
Thanks for lots of useful advices, Ziemanskye! I'll try making bump maps before running Nvidia filter. (Is that the way it should be?) Does making image greyscale and fixing things (bumps) by hand will be enough? Is some tutorial needed?
It's strange that GIMP filter makes normal maps look OK in T3Ed while Nvidia maps are ugly. :confused:
What compression format should I use for T3Ed then? (Sorry for such questions. I'm really a newbe.)
Ziemanskye on 9/5/2005 at 14:55
Bukary, it's not like I'm an expert in this. Besides, if you can get this to work then the whole community can hopefully replicate it and away we go...
Converting Bump Maps is just how everything worked when I last looked into it, so you could try experimenting with making it Grayscale or Embossing it and playing about that way, and any Remove Noise/Remove Artifact things might make it smoother and neater - I'd guess the GIMP version does more of that than the Nvidia filter, hence the differences between versions. Though if you are creating Normals from a 'doctored' Bump, then it should hopefully be smoother no matter which filter/format you use.
And I think T3Ed needs things to be in dds DXT1, though I haven't tested it, but you could try creating normal maps from a bitmap or targa then converting into dds after you have the images you want. Need to find some way to guarantee you get your mipmaps when you convert though.
Good Luck. :thumb:
bukary on 9/5/2005 at 15:51
I am really confused. :confused:
It seems that TDS supports DTX3 normal maps (although these are bigger files with unnecessary alpha information). I wonder if it is OK to use DXT3 in FMs. Why DXT3? Because DDS DXT1 normal maps are blurry in some places and look horrible. At least the ones I was able to create. It also must have something to do with lighting in TDS.
Here's what I did:
I created "bump map" (greyscale, opposite colors etc.), then I run some filters (remove noise, convert to RGB etc.), then I run Nvidia filter, and saved my normal map as DDS DXT1. It seemed to look OK in T3Ed, but I noticed that there are places where texture suddenly becomes very, very blurry.
I created normal map in GIMP (from diffuse, not bump map) and saved as DDS DXT3. It looks OK in TDS. I haven't noticed any serious anomalies. I would save it as DDS DXT1, but this option in inactive in GIMP, and I don't know why.
Then I opened GIMP normal map (DDS DXT3) in Photoshop and saved as DDS DXT1. It also looked blurry in some places...
It would be great if someone also could try different compression formats and filters, so that we could compare our results and filter settings...
I suspect that there's something wrong with me. :) I probably don't know how to set Nvidia filter properly.
ascottk on 10/5/2005 at 02:41
The GIMP does support DXT1 if you flatten the image before you apply the normalmap. There's no need to flatten if you're using DXT3. As for mipmaps, OrbWeaver's mipmaps with the GIMP show up as being blank but I have no problem with mipmap generation.
[EDIT] DXT3 works seems to work fine in T3Ed
*Why am I posting stuff about the GIMP in two threads? Is there someway to combine the ATI Normalmap Generator thread with this one?
bukary on 10/5/2005 at 16:41
Are mipmaps really needed, if we talk about custom textures? As far as I know, almost none of TDS original textures use mipmaps... :confused:
New Horizon on 10/5/2005 at 16:55
Quote Posted by bukary
Are mipmaps really needed, if we talk about custom textures? As far as I know, almost none of TDS original textures use mipmaps... :confused:
I thought they did?
OrbWeaver on 10/5/2005 at 17:57
Quote Posted by bukary
Are mipmaps really needed, if we talk about custom textures? As far as I know, almost none of TDS original textures use mipmaps... :confused:
They do - open one of the DDS files with the GIMP and you can see them in separate layers.
As far as I am aware, mipmaps are a standard part of 3D game rendering. I cannot see any reason for avoiding them.
