[Omniscaper]

As I suspected.... the same results for the Colossus. The stock PCX 256 color textures perform much slower than the DDR 24bit RGB version.

PCX:


DDS:


"Prt Scr" button took 6 fps from the DDS picture and 4 from the PCX.

So all in all, this shows a 50 percent increase in performance.

[Lightspeed]

Omniscaper: MY EYES!!! they burn!

use 8-bit or down-size them. EVERYthing, but DDS! It's just too horrible to look at, and even at your relatively high JPG compression the artifacts are just too horrible to look at.

If you want to optimize, optimize. There's several ways to achieve that. DDS is the worst of them.

-edit: As for the thrusters, there's a MUCH more efficient way to save memory with them, without any visual quality loss. I could probably release a fixed version in a day or two if it's that much of an issue to people. It'd cut down the memory usage even more than using DDS, while looking indistinguishably similar (as opposed to DDS' horribly artifacted uglieness).

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Trashman, are you using Lightspeed's new shinemaps with that Colossus? I'm trying to do a benchmark comparing DDS vs TGA with multitexture FS2 ships.

There are no new shinemaps from me for the colossus. Just thought i'd mention that

[Omniscaper]

LOL, Lightspeed. I understand and agree with your position with DDS in reguard to colo gradiations. I'm just giving advice to  folks with mid to low end computers to get boost with their aging systems.

Just remember DDS was specifically designed for Direct-X. So expect better performance.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Liberator
Somehow I doubt Kaz was saying that when the GF2 was on top of the heap.

i've always said that nVidia chips are PIECES OF ****

FPS is not a total measure of 'quality'

[Lightspeed]

There's ways to do it without completely killing people's eyes.

[Blitzerland]

No new Colossus texture? That's okay, Lightspeed. The texture-releases kind of make you an infallible god.

*sacrifices heathens

[Omniscaper]

Lightspeed, your prejudice against DDS never ceases to amaze me. You truly are a perfectionistic artist. And thats not necessarily a bad thing when you have an uber computer.

I use DDS when running on this aging 2.56ghz P4 with Geforce4 MX. When using my home Xeon 2.6ghz with Radeon 9500 pro (still no shine maps... DAMN YOU ATI) I use your flawless TGA's.

[Lightspeed]

There will be, but as of yet there isn't. I just like how people
a) think their slowdowns come from my stuff when absolutely nothing new is in there (i.e. collossus textures)
b) still think TGA are used in my releases

and wehey, due to the current situation, I have changed my signature!

First linky is a comparison chart of different (including memory saving) ways to store files, with the artifacting of each format ,etc, clearly shown.

Second linky is there to find your optimal file format for individual effects, choose from four candidates and read up your ideal file format

-edit: check the linkies, Omniscaper. You shall see. It's just not an option for backgrounds and/or effects. Besides, all my shine1.5 textures are DDS (why? simple. Most textures do NOT use smooth gradients, but are "chaotic" enough to not cause TOO many artifacts. Also, the larger the texture, the less intense the DDS artifacts will turn out. DDS is good for really really large ship textures.)

[Omniscaper]

Whoa!!!!  What program are you using to create dds? ASomething's amiss.  My own comparison results are not that drastic.

[Lightspeed]

They are. Heck, I can even see it through that heavy JPG compression on your nebula screenshots.

The only way to save DDS without those problems is saving them uncompressed, which in turn, makes them the same as TGA.

[KARMA]

OUCH!!!
Don't post those Colossus shots again!!
and not because of dds artifacts, but because that model is TOOO horrible, it makes me sick:)
Holy **** it was a long I did not see that ship and I didn't remember she was so damn crap:)

[Lightspeed]

You cant see DDS artifacts on the collossus image anyway. The thrusters are too far away, artifacts get killed due to JPG compression, and he "conveniently" doesn't have the nearer and larger rear thrusters in the screen on the DDS version.

[Omniscaper]

Are you accusingh me of something.... let me repost FAIR screenshots then.

Lightspeed, I didn't mean my previously posted picture comparisons. I got Photoshop running right now and did my own comparisons and they are not that drastic. Can you send my your uncompressed comparison chart?

[KARMA]

I haven't even checked for artifacts since I was already shocked enough by the brick in the middle of the screen:D

[Liberator]

Karma!  Stop it!

Lightspeed, I understand you're desire to maintain a certain quality level, but DDS is the only way forward  Either that or stick with 256-color PCXs.

[Omniscaper]

Pictures updated and results the same. I just realized that the Colossus still uses stock PCX textures and have changed the caption accordingly. I will now make TGA versions of the PCX. I put the thruster glows out of the picture because it kills this Geforce4 MX no matter what format. I guess there are just too many textures for this POS card.

I think this is an unexpected win for DDS. They out perform STOCK textures which run in 256 colors.


BUT BACK TO TOPIC!!!!

Didn't mean to turn this into a DDS VS TGA skirmish. (but the war aint over Lightspeed )


Trashman, as you can see, the Colossus kills fps because of high number of textures and thruster maps. DDS helps performance in reguard to its own textures. Like Lightspeed said, DDS works well with a ship such as this. It also works well as PCX replacement.

[Lightspeed]

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Lightspeed, I didn't mean my previously posted picture comparisons. I got Photoshop running right now and did my own comparisons and they are not that drastic. Can you send my your uncompressed comparison chart?

I can send you the uncompressed TGA & DDS graphics, if you want. And yes, I use Photoshop as well.

[Flaser]

Originally posted by Omniscaper
Pictures updated and results the same. I just realized that the Colossus still uses stock PCX textures and have changed the caption accordingly. I will now make TGA versions of the PCX. I put the thruster glows out of the picture because it kills this Geforce4 MX no matter what format. I guess there are just too many textures for this POS card.

I think this is an unexpected win for DDS. They out perform STOCK textures which run in 256 colors.


BUT BACK TO TOPIC!!!!

Didn't mean to turn this into a DDS VS TGA skirmish. (but the war aint over Lightspeed )


Trashman, as you can see, the Colossus kills fps because of high number of textures and thruster maps. DDS helps performance in reguard to its own textures. Like Lightspeed said, DDS works well with a ship such as this. It also works well as PCX replacement.

He doesn't outright deny DDS its own right, instead he states that DDS is not capable of properly storing color gradients, which are abundant in effects and some background images.
Instead DDS he suggest TGA for those - and prooves that it IS possible to make them useably small.

However he himself uses DDS for ship textures since they are chaotic enough to use the format.

I really apreciate your effort to bring the old textures up speed. However some ships are really problematic, like the Hatsepsuth, and the Collusus you took under your scapel. Though baking/uw-ing some of those ships could help a lot - though Bobbau's latest Orion remake makes me wonder wheter that is possible.

[Omniscaper]

::SIGH::

I am merely trying to help Trashman get better performance with the Colossus in particular. DDS and TGA have their good points. TGA for quality, DDS for performance.

I am not attacking Lightspeed for using TGA's which I use myself. I was merely using his nebulas as an example of a heavy TGA use scenario. If I had a lousy rig, and FSO was unplayable because of his TGA usage, I would recommend people to use DDS so they can still see his hard work though in a lesser quality. The suggestion is not a personal attack on  Lightspeed. EVERYONE with dated hardware must sacrifice quality for performance. Its a balance issue that will always be there. I doubt Lightspeed would want people with low end rigs  to avoid his work altogether because their hardware can't handle it. I'm merely suggesting some form of compromise.

Am I biased for DDS, yes. Do I agree with Lightspeed's assesment of DDS failings, yes. DDS suck at subtle gradiations, and compression techniques, but they are excellent in improving performance, ESPECIALLY large textures ranging from 1024x1024 to 4096x4096.

[TrashMan]

Originally posted by Kosh
One thing I probably have mentioned before. This might be related. Whenever a Hatshepsut appears, my framerates drop by no less than 15 or so FPS. Am I the only one with that issue?

nope, happens to me too..


And just for your information, I'm never running any background processes. Hate those things...

DDS textures? Do it Omni!

Shinemaps? Hmm.. I did downlaod onyl a few, none was for Colossus, but I re-instaled FS2...Now, come to think of it, I didn't delete the Maps directory... But I don't recall my ships being shinemaped in-game...

And allso just for the record, the slowdown isn't that cathastrophich or that common. Game runs rather well most of the time at max details. But that sez nothing, since I played Far Cry wiht no slowdowns....