Page 24 of 27

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 04 Oct 2017, 23:18
by Faelian
Looks nice although that line with bigger bricks stands out horribly. I know it was like this in vanilla too but perhaps you could consider redesigning this texture a bit to make it have a bit more sense?

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 05 Oct 2017, 04:58
by lysol
Faelian wrote:
04 Oct 2017, 23:18
Looks nice although that line with bigger bricks stands out horribly. I know it was like this in vanilla too but perhaps you could consider redesigning this texture a bit to make it have a bit more sense?
Yup it does... :/ Real dilemma here. I don't want to stray too far away from vanilla, but that line is just so misplaced it hurts.

I'll see what I can do. Thanks.

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 14 Nov 2017, 23:05
by Mojo
Hey your normal mapped textures look great in game! :)
By the way do the normal maps need an alpha channel or wouldn't it be better for compression to create them without alpha?

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 15 Nov 2017, 04:15
by lysol
Thanks!

Normal maps with height info (i.e. Parallax maps) need alpha. The rest do not. Of course file size is smaller without alpha, so I do not save with alpha unless I actually use it.

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 15 Nov 2017, 12:34
by Mojo
lysol wrote:
15 Nov 2017, 04:15
Normal maps with height info (i.e. Parallax maps) need alpha. The rest do not.
Can you create this hight info with a 2D progranm (= Photoshop/GIMP) or do you need a 3D program (=Blender) for it to to model the hight?

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 15 Nov 2017, 12:54
by lysol
Mojo wrote:
15 Nov 2017, 12:34
lysol wrote:
15 Nov 2017, 04:15
Normal maps with height info (i.e. Parallax maps) need alpha. The rest do not.
Can you create this hight info with a 2D progranm (= Photoshop/GIMP) or do you need a 3D program (=Blender) for it to to model the hight?
Making both height/parallax maps and normal maps is always better done in a 3D program if you have the skill to do it correctly. However, I make my normal maps and parallax maps in 2D programs because of lack of time and not being good enough with any 3D sculpting application. I edit the texture I'm working with in Photoshop to look kind of like a height texture and then load it in an app called MindTex (CrazyBump, AwesomeBump etc works similarly), which generates real height and normal maps based on the loaded image.

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 15 Nov 2017, 22:21
by Mojo
lysol wrote:
15 Nov 2017, 12:54
Making both height/parallax maps and normal maps is always better done in a 3D program if you have the skill to do it correctly. However, I make my normal maps and parallax maps in 2D programs because of lack of time and not being good enough with any 3D sculpting application. I edit the texture I'm working with in Photoshop to look kind of like a height texture and then load it in an app called MindTex (CrazyBump, AwesomeBump etc works similarly), which generates real height and normal maps based on the loaded image.
Thank you! Now I can try to create my own normal maps for my mods. :)

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 16 Nov 2017, 08:37
by lysol
Most normal map generators interprate highlights as "raised" objects and shadows as "low" objects, if you get what I'm trying to say. So while you might make a diffuse (the base color texture) texture with the light source coming from the side or something like that, you have to reshade the texure you load in MindTex/CrazyBump/AwesomeBump as if the light source was pointing straight at your texture to get the best result. It's kind of hard to explain without images, and I'm at work now, so I hope you get my description.

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 19 Nov 2017, 16:39
by Mojo
Thank you, your explanation is good to understand. ;)

Re: Lysol's normal mapped texture packs

Posted: 13 Nov 2018, 21:40
by lysol
So uhm. I got carried away today. Not too much though (yet), since I don't have anything to release. But seriously. My old tx_wall_stone_01.dds for the imperial pack sucked. Here's a new one I'm working on. I found a texture that seemed to fit a lot better. Of course, as with all textures I like the most, it was not seamless, so I had to work a lot with it to make it seamless. Is it any better now or should I just stop wasting time?

https://imgur.com/a/lMzcCWT

I plan on packing together my previous textures into the new project atlas by the way. I hope to release that the same time as an update of the imperial pack + imperial forts.