Renzatic on 27/10/2009 at 22:37

---

You've got the right idea, but you need a fine detail layer to sharpen it up a bit (a single shallow pass in the normalmapper will do you there), and you need to stack more layers on there to build the depth.

Truthfully, for a texture like that, doing random blurs and stacks probably won't get you what you're wanting. The end result will be too spongy and lack the definition you need to make it look decent. What I'd do is make an extra layer and paint out everything except your major details. Like your leaves, your trimmings, basically the parts you want to stand out in contrast to the rest. Run the results there through your normalmapper then start adding in your noise details.

Remember, your normalmap doesn't have to be based off a single texture you build from all in one go. I usually separate everything into component parts first. Like I want the border first, so I'll cut it out from the rest and do my thing, then do the trimmings, the leave details, ect. Once I've got them all looking halfway decent, I'll mix them together via overlay layers and start doing the fixing up. For a texture like your trimming there, this would be the best approach in my opinion.

Alternately, you could try and make a model of it and run it through renderbump flat.

Edit: Actually, I'm doing a texture based off a model and combining it with another texture as I write this. This is more complicated stuff, but it'd be a good step by step to show off some of what I do.

Melan on 28/10/2009 at 07:04

---

Whoa, that's probably right. It's a bit of a culture shock after creating Dromed textures; you just had to cut, tile and pallettise them, and all that could be done with Irfanview and running your images through Bright. This is a whole new world... I will try this when I'm back from work. I've also been experimenting with the darken/lighten tool; seems like the right stuff to accentuate contrasts a bit.

Renzatic on 28/10/2009 at 15:57

---

Yup. It's a bit more of an indepth process than what you're used to, but the results are that much more rewarding for it. When you get your first textures done, and you see how all your efforts have resulted in a much more detailed and lively environment than what you could get in T1 & 2, you won't want to go back.

Like Judith said, take your time and learn the techniques. Do that, and you'll be flying through them sooner than you think.

Renzatic on 29/10/2009 at 02:29

---

I looks like you're not working your midranges enough. One looks too high, the other too low. Your second one looks to be the one that turned out the best. What I'd do is take another original pass and overlay it once or twice to build up some of your sharper details, and maybe hide or delete some of your blurrier layers.

Also, from the way you're making it sound, it seems like you're blurring your texture each time you lay down a new layer. You don't have to do that. You can take your texture that's been gaussianed 4x and stack it 3 or 4 times to build up detail there. Take subtler steps, and experiment with stacking more layers on. I've had textures that have gone 30 deep and only gone as high as gaussian blur 8.

Melan on 29/10/2009 at 07:14

---

Renzatic: hm, I tried it now with a constant Gaussian 4, two base layers and four blurred ones. The problem is the same as in case 1) - too much crunch. Basically, I can't find a solution that's the midway between 1), or leaving too much detail in the original image, and 2), or blurring it so the details don't intrude but the mapping is no longer exact.

I have got to go to work, but I will check back in the evening to experiment a bit. (I am also unfamiliar with the meaning of "midranges" - sorry!)