Hard Light Productions Forums
Community Projects => The FreeSpace Upgrade Project => Topic started by: Yuzuki5749 on July 14, 2011, 04:52:20 pm
-
Hey guys,
I wanna know your oppinion about editing the shine-textures, because I think the models are looking like plastic-models.
It doesn't really look like steal, metal, titan or something else, because the texture isn't so reflective how it should (in my oppinion).
I think the models would look a little bit better when they are a little bit more "steally"...
An excample:
(http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/8563/medusashine.jpg) (http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/8563/medusashine.jpg)
-
The current Medusa has its shine-maps set like that because it isn't supposed to look like it just rolled out of a factory/shipyard. While your version does indeed look more metalish, it just doesn't fit with the design philosophy FSU employed. Besides, canon textures also imply that there are some layers of dirt and various other stuff on the ship.
-
Indeed, while there is a place for your work on the medusa, which is really good. The medusa is always been presented as a workhorse design, looked after but not always loved. the original texture is matt with scorch/blast type marks surrounding the bomb racks and signs of general wear and tear in other places
(http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/images/Gtbmedusa-old.jpg)
I could see these textured used in a campaign where the medusa is a new design or there is a modified version in play
-
Thing is even though they're made out of metal compounds, military vehicles of any form of transit lack shine of that level. Having a low level of shine to give the ships in the game some "Ooh factor" is good and all, but when the levels get higher it reaches a point where ships appear to be made with crystalline coating, or in extreme cases such as the Ancient ships on ASW Act 1 or the Lucifer in older releases of BP: AoA, ships appear to have been thrown into an ocean of baby oil and hot car wax, which they then simply look attrocious.
-
While I'm not 100% behind the suggested level of increased shine from the environment alpha-channel, I'm always willing to listen to suggestions, and I appreciate seeing yours (and the work you took in presenting it)
It can be difficult, especially with various different designs, to reach a consistent level of appearance that is in keeping with the settings. Especially since many users use many different settings.
I try and make sure that the appearance of any model is appropriate with no custom parameters for the lighting settings. And with as much feedback from the modeller and texture artist as I can get. And all of those have to balance to some degree with some adherence to the original Retail textures, in as much as the improved model and textures will allow.
Obviously, not every decision is going to be an instant win. And that's okay so long as people communicate their ideas clearly and in a civil fashion.
To get back more on topic though, that is a nice looking appearance for the Medusa, and it would maybe work out better with some alterations in the FSPort MediaVPs where the ship is newer and just introduced.
And while the Space Shuttle and ISS are not great examples, given that both are mostly white to start out with, they reflect and refract light based on their material coloration, not based on what that material is.
-
Hmm, interesting... I actually sort of like it, but I think something a little more toned down might serve better, personally. Right now, some parts get a little bit too 'chromish', at least in my opinion. What's with the glow-points on the primaries? Those look weird.
-
I know that FSU set the shine-textures like that how it is right now, but I think that not everyone really like these shine textures...
But it could be, that I'm the only who doesn't really like the current shine-textures...
Errr, the glow-points?
They should mark the primarie-weapons, nothing else. Ignore them^^
Which parts are too "chromish", Hades?
-
On the underside of the missile pods, that bright part near the three pipes, is a bit too chromish I mean, I think elsewhere is fine. As for the shine textures? I honestly like them a little bit more, it brings out the color and helps it to be a little less dark.
-
Will this be better or is it even too glossy?
The texture got little bit darker at the section which you've discripted.
(http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/2416/medusao.png) (http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/2416/medusao.png)
Or completely like the original?
(http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/2296/medusa2.png) (http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/2296/medusa2.png)
As for the shine textures?
Yes, the glossy effect at the texture is only effected by the shine-texture.
The main-texture (Medusa.dds) is still the same texture which you've posted in your GTB Medusa Release-Thread...
-
Oh I know, I meant your shine textures in particular which I like better than the old ones.
As for those two? I like the new shinemap of yours in the second image.
-
I actually really like the way it looks on the second screen, with the exception of perhaps the front of the intakes appearing red / bright orange. Though I wonder if I was to look at the Medusa with the shinemap proposed on the second image as I use Herra Tohtori's light settings (High specular and emphasized shine), how much more shine it would end up showing.
-
Oh I know, I meant your shine textures in particular which I like better than the old ones.
oh, sorry, than I understood this part wrong...:sigh:
-
Oh I know, I meant your shine textures in particular which I like better than the old ones.
oh, sorry, than I understood this part wrong...:sigh:
Nah, that's fine, it happens. But do keep working on your new ones, I rather like how they're coming.
-
Thought I'd toss my 2 cents in as a lurker.
I like what you're doing. While I know FSO works hard to make the models look as unified as possible, it's definitely noticeable that some are much shinier than others, and it doesn't really seem to be consistent with a race or type of ship as far as i can tell.
If you wanted to take it upon yourself to attempt to get the shinemaps (or whatever they're called, I'm ignorant) a little more consistent, I certainly think it's a good idea.
Then again what do I know?
-
I know that it's difficult to unify all the fighters, bombers, capitals (and so on).
But i don't really like the mat texture.
Hmm...
I could post my work, if you want.
-
I know that it's difficult to unify all the fighters, bombers, capitals (and so on).
But i don't really like the mat texture.
Hmm...
I could post my work, if you want.
Please do, though is it the low rez (1024) or the higher rez (2048) version, out of curiosity?
-
ok.
I don't really know which version it will be, because I only use what I have.
It means when a texture is high-rez-version it will be a high-rez-version (which is easier for me to edit)
and when it's a 512p-version it will be a 512p-version...
I can't create completely new textures, which is a big problem i think...
I think the Artemis/Artemis D.H. and the Perseus will be the next.
-
Out of curiosity, what lighting settings are you using? I'm a bit surprised that you think the Perseus is too matte, because it really isn't.
-
the brightness in-game?
I use the standard-setting for this.
-
I think Kolgena meant these (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Sample_Lighting_Settings).
-
ah, thanks.
I haven't editted the lightning settings. So i'm playing with the default settings, i think.
-
I recommend you give those custom flags a try. There's a world of difference to be seen in terms of lighting.
-
I recommend you give those custom flags a try. There's a world of difference to be seen in terms of lighting.
Ok, I'll give it a try, but not yet.
Here's the Artemis D.H.
(http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4268/artemisdh.png) (http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4268/artemisdh.png)
-
I definitely prefer your version on this one. It shows a lot more texture detail than the previous one, and is simply better looking in general. :yes:
-
See, the thing is, these ships look extra matte because the specularity settings aren't turned up in your lighting settings. That's what I'm concerned about.
(tbf, the Artemises are fairly matte compared to the rest of stuff)
-
It looks like the hull is made out of jade, which despite the silliness in the idea, it looks really cool.
I propose if this shinemap replaces what we currently have, that D.H. wings are parts of Aztecan-themed squadron names. :D
-
It's intended that the Artemis D.H. is darker than other terran and vasudan fighters and bombers. I don't know what D.H. means but I know that the "D." means "Dark" and the "H." could mean "Hunter", "Hawk" or something else...
Whatever...
It's intended that I set the texture a bit darker than the original.
-
Yuzuki5749, you get my vote but please don't worry about whether or not the FSUP uses your textures. Please plow ahead, make yours as you wish, and make an alternative pack out of it. :D It'll last until models get updated.
-
Keep going, Yuzuki, I really like both the medusa and artemis shine maps you have done so far. Please be sure to make them at 2048^2 resolution for the mv_advanced pack and that way they can be scaled down for regular (easier to scale a texture down than up)
-
The Artemis:
(http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/8971/artemis.png)
-
lower the intensity of the shine map by 50%, maybe that will improve more, as it stands now I would still go with the original one.. yours gets too intense.
-
I agree. It looks like tin foil in the middle and bottom pic.
(Did you talk to Sab0o about doing these?)
-
Are you also playing around with the color of the shine-map? One of the coolest, thought oft unused features of FSO is that you can give an object a different colored shine than the diffuse map.
-
Shinin' it up real nice. Turn that sum**** sideways and stick it straight up their candy-***!!
Always liked shiny textures. I'm good with them. Especially when there's enough roughness on the hull's detailed textures.
-
Nice ones Yuzuki, that gets a thumbs up.
The thing you could try exploring is the differentiation in materials. As it is now, every material shines by the same amount more or less. If you would, for instance, make the differences between metal and paint really stand out (paint doesn't shine as much as metal: the red stripes on the Artemis could be almost black on the shine map, for example), I'm sure the ships would look miles better, more graphical. :)
-
Is this better?
(http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/2995/artemis2.png)
Are you also playing around with the color of the shine-map? One of the coolest, thought oft unused features of FSO is that you can give an object a different colored shine than the diffuse map.
...like this?
I've done this month before.
(http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/4349/gefjon.png)
-
that looks way better, I still think it might need a tiny reduction on the reflection but it's definitely a big improvement.
-
The Ulysses:
(http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/6647/ulysses.png)
-
I like it, but maybe the Ulysses could wait until the glaringly obvious untextured strip above the primary mounts is fixed.
-
I've asked both peterv and VA about it and they've both pointed me to each other so I have no idea when it will ever get fixed. Besides, the thing needs to be reuvmapped because it currently uses the retail texture, and thus needs a new, custom one made for it.
-
Doesn't the retail texture have one blue light on the wingtips?
-
Oh, the primaries aren't completely mapped? :wtf: :confused:
I haven't noticed that...:doubt:
-
Yeah but there's a lot of stretching on the texture so I don't find those faces having being mapped to the same part of the texture inconceivable, Zane, or the mapping being 'moved up' the ship or even a minor texture edit.
EDIT: Looking at the texture, it looks like it may have indeed been a minor texture edit.
-
Hmm, ok.
I'll wait till it's fixed.
-
The Perseus:
(http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/1792/perseus.png)
Please, don't wonder if some details can't be shown :doubt:
-
Hm, the Ulysses seems pretty shiny already when bloom is activated. Doesn't that shiny-texture + bloom totally blow the effect out?
-
Ulysses? What are you talking about?
That Perseus is too glossy for my taste. IMO, the original shine texture gave it the perfect brushed metal look. If you haven't picked light settings yet, I highly recommend that you at least use the MVP recommended settings. I don't think anyone here actually uses the engine defaults, which frankly, look pretty terrible, and are not suitable to use when comparing ship shininess.
(Since you're on shine textures, would you care to take a peak at the Hatchepsut? I remember a number of people complaining that it was TOO shiny. I know you are upping the shine on stuff, but it should be as easy to adjust down as it is to adjust up, right? You should only feel compelled to do so if you also feel that the Hatchepsut is too shiny for its own good.)
-
I don't think anyone here actually uses the engine defaults, which frankly, look pretty terrible, and are not suitable to use when comparing ship shininess.
:nervous:
-
(Since you're on shine textures, would you care to take a peak at the Hatchepsut? I remember a number of people complaining that it was TOO shiny. I know you are upping the shine on stuff, but it should be as easy to adjust down as it is to adjust up, right? You should only feel compelled to do so if you also feel that the Hatchepsut is too shiny for its own good.)
The Hatshepsut is really too shiny...
I hope this one isn't doo dark...:
(http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/824/hatshepsut.png)
-
I approve of the darkened Hattie textures.
I highly disapprove of all the more shiny versions. Things need MORE GRIMDARK GRIME and ****, the dirtier the better. This isn't HOT RODS IN SPACE. This is a GRITTY WAR STORY. I want my stuff coated in sixteen different layers of space dirt. Stop wrapping my fighters with cellophane.
You complain that the originals don't look "metal" and look "plastic".
I assert the opposite!
Your Hattie is good though.
-
/lurk
Your 2nd attempt at the Artemis is excellent with the differentiation in shine between the paint and non-paint portions. I, too, think it could stand to be a little less shiny still, but you're doing some fantastic work here. Please keep it up!
-
Ulysses? What are you talking about?
The Ulysses:
(http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/6647/ulysses.png)
Maybe I'm wrong with my thoughts and bloom is there already activated.
The bronze look of the Hattie's pretty cool though :yes:
-
Are you also playing around with the color of the shine-map? One of the coolest, thought oft unused features of FSO is that you can give an object a different colored shine than the diffuse map.
...like this?
I've done this month before.
(http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/4349/gefjon.png)
Yeah, exactly like that.
Giving the surface just a tad different specular sheen seems like a good technique to show off that this is metal with a coat of protective varnish, not just a shiny paint job. It's visually also more interesting than just a shiny surface.
BTW do you add some noise/patterns to your shinemaps different from the diffuse map? The new Hattie makes me think so, but I thought I'd just make sure.
-
BTW do you add some noise/patterns to your shinemaps different from the diffuse map? The new Hattie makes me think so, but I thought I'd just make sure.
No I haven't add noise to the shinemap, but there were noises on the original-map (MVP 3.6.12) which I've editted.
They weren't visible because of the higher shine-level of the original (which have been editted, too ;)).
-
The hattie looks much better. (May I ask why you're using the old version with the broken glow maps? I think Zacam (?) released a fix some time ago, to turn the window spotlights from yellow splotches of glow paint back into baked lighting. It's not like using that version is bad for the shine map of course; I'm just curious)
I have to echo other people's views on the other shiny ships though. If you picked an amount of shininess between what you have now and what was there before for the artemises, that would be fantastic. I personally don't like the changes to the perseus and ulysses though.
@T-LoW: Derp, sorry. I somehow missed that on the previous page >.<
-
I am of the opinion that if we are to bother with a shine-map then make it obvious. Subtlety on fighters does no one any good, as no one will see it. Only in a thread such as this will people stop and nitpik about, "would a grungy material reflect light." In game, I doubt people would have cared so much. There is something to be said for the menacing look of sunlight glinting on an incoming fighter, although not stealthy it looks cool! All i see is that each one of these after shots is an improvement to the overall image.
-
Well, it's not like the current shine maps aren't doing any good. Have you tried going into the ship lab and turning off shine maps to see what things look like?
Besides, if you like super shiny, use the light flags to do that. Double all your -spec_static etc and up your contrast in post-processing, and your sunlight/lights will really start glinting. It makes more sense to get all the shine maps consistent with each other, so that playing around with the light flags won't result in one ship looking perfect, another looking matte, and another looking like it's made of pure silver.
(And welcome to HLP, where everyone loves nitpicking about the tiniest details--though this is probably why HLP makes some of the best mod material out there.)
-
/lurk
Your 2nd attempt at the Artemis is excellent with the differentiation in shine between the paint and non-paint portions. I, too, think it could stand to be a little less shiny still, but you're doing some fantastic work here. Please keep it up!
Is one of them better?
(http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/1046/artemis3.png)
-
Try running the game with -shine and -env turned off and then tell me that it's "too subtle" or "makes no point" because they do.
The biggest issue is consistency and aesthetic. And not all -shine/-env alterations are going to look well on all custom lighting settings.
Every -shine/-env needs to pass a minimum of (in my opinion) only 2 light settings: Default Engine settings, and the Recommended Settings. Anything else, starts verging into the category of too many cooks for a single pot for too many plates.
I'm all for adapting enhancements, but some of these seem like they might be a bit much to me. But I'd say keep going with them and those that like them will undoubtedly use them.
-
Well, it's not like the current shine maps aren't doing any good. Have you tried going into the ship lab and turning off shine maps to see what things look like?
I already tried that (and some light-settings, too (what you've recommed :wtf:) :p
(And welcome to HLP, where everyone loves nitpicking about the tiniest details--though this is probably why HLP makes some of the best mod material out there.)
Thanks. HLP is doing great work in improving Freespace (2)
-
lol, I was directing that shine-map comment to darklord, since he was complaining that the shine maps are too subtle right now. :P
4th ed. Artemis looks pretty good. It's losing its eggshell/laminated plaster look.
-
While the adjustments you've made do look pretty good in some cases, it doesn't seem like you've done much that can't be done by changing your lighting/bloom settings.
From your PM it sounded like you wanted to make a new texture for the Artemis' :blah: :(
-
While the adjustments you've made do look pretty good in some cases, it doesn't seem like you've done much that can't be done by changing your lighting/bloom settings.
From your PM it sounded like you wanted to make a new texture for the Artemis' :blah: :(
I haven't said that I'll create completely new maps...:blah:
I only said that I will edit them...:blah:
-
/lurk
Your 2nd attempt at the Artemis is excellent with the differentiation in shine between the paint and non-paint portions. I, too, think it could stand to be a little less shiny still, but you're doing some fantastic work here. Please keep it up!
Is one of them better?
(http://img813.imageshack.us/img813/1046/artemis3.png)
I think the 4th iteration looks better, however with the shine this "soft", we're back to plasticine territory. The intensity it right, but it needs a bit more variation to make it "metallic" ...maybe some noise? ...how about some thin lines, like the kind you get when you extrude metal?
Note: I'm only talking about the shine-map. The whole idea should be about the byplay between the "smooth" diffuse map and the shinemap that has some "tricks" to it.
Maybe I'm on the wrong track here, and such "surface" qualities are better created by adding noise to the normal map?
-
I think the 4th iteration looks better, however with the shine this "soft", we're back to plasticine territory. The intensity it right, but it needs a bit more variation to make it "metallic" ...maybe some noise? ...how about some thin lines, like the kind you get when you extrude metal?
Note: I'm only talking about the shine-map. The whole idea should be about the byplay between the "smooth" diffuse map and the shinemap that has some "tricks" to it.
Maybe I'm on the wrong track here, and such "surface" qualities are better created by adding noise to the normal map?
It's better to add noise to the normal- or diffuse-map, because the noise wouldn't be visible when you add it to the shinemap
-
Most "imperfections" in a metallic surface would actually be rendered non-visible by high-intensity reflection of lighting. So adding them anywhere would not make any sense.
Any highly obvious panel bevels for example, would be made harder to see by the reflection of the surrounding material, and at the right angle, the bevel itself would be "filled" with light as well.
(A good example of this would be the Space Shuttle bay doors. The seams for each segment are almost impossible to see when it's sun-ward facing unless you are up close, but are highly visible on the moderately shaded side)
Dirt and grunge would still be visible, but might became muted. Not because of the underlying material, but again because of the surrounding material saturating the area. This is especially true for any super-reflective material (non-painted or coated metal (especially if it's polished), any polished painted or coated surface (most notably any non-absorbing color) or glass (especially mirrored))
-
The Faustus:
(http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/8896/faustus.png)
-
/me likes his saturation and shiny in ships. Grimdark be damned.
-
I like it.
-
F***, I have to do most of this work from the beginning except of the Medusa and the Artemis D.H., because my Windows crashed on Sunday...:banghead: :( :blah:
-
my Windows crashed on Sunday...:banghead: :( :blah:
Try Knoppix. I always have a Knoppix bootable CD knocking around, as if Windows won't boot, Knoppix will and I've usually been able to recover most of the stuff that wasn't backed up.
-
my Windows crashed on Sunday...:banghead: :( :blah:
Try Knoppix. I always have a Knoppix bootable CD knocking around, as if Windows won't boot, Knoppix will and I've usually been able to recover most of the stuff that wasn't backed up.
Heh, exactly. It all really depends what you mean by "Windows crashed" - if it's not a case of a hard drive problem (i.e. data loss), then you have many options for grabbing the old data and storing it somewhere else, if a reinstall of Windows happens to be needed. Subsequently, you then wouldn't need to start over.
-
I don't know if I like shiny. What possible purpose would there be in making your ships easier to see? It would be that much harder to conceal your ship or secret supply depot in that dense asteroid field or what have you. Plus, wouldn't the thousands of micro-meteoroid impacts naturally rough up the surface too?
-
By that logic, why aren't all the ships spherical black warcows to economize on space and eliminate blind spots? The reason is that that would be boring.
Also there is no stealth in space, a spaceship is going to be really, really obvious to hard-SF sensors against a backdrop of extremely cold space rocks.
-
if you are toying with the lighting settings, IIRC there should be a spec_power or something to that effect, assuming the shaders honor it, making it a low number will make everything look more metallic.
-
I don't know if I like shiny. What possible purpose would there be in making your ships easier to see? It would be that much harder to conceal your ship or secret supply depot in that dense asteroid field or what have you. Plus, wouldn't the thousands of micro-meteoroid impacts naturally rough up the surface too?
If you want an in-universe justification: Most weaponry is laser/light based, or at least looks that way. Reflective armor is highly effective against these sorts of attacks.
-
Isn't the current Colossus a bit TOO shiny, like the Hatshepsut?
(http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/3899/colossus.png)
-
I'd probably wait until the HTL Colossus is released, if it comes in the next MVPs.
-
Yeah. Current colossus isn't HTL, so don't bother mucking with its maps since they'll become useless rather soon.
-
I really don't like the way tilemaps that aren't being used by canon models anymore are deprecated from new mediavp versions. Those tilemaps are often used by many, many custom models.
-
I know there was talk of putting together a compatibility pack .vp, so as to alleviate the need to keep the 3.6.10 VPs around, but I don't know if anything ever came of it.
-
I really don't like the way tilemaps that aren't being used by canon models anymore are deprecated from new mediavp versions. Those tilemaps are often used by many, many custom models.
This thread is not about that. We've had that discussion several times. Let's stay on topic please?
The HTL Colossus is on track to be in the next MVPs release.
-
The HTL Colossus is on track to be in the next MVPs release.
:yes::yes::yes:
-
Ok, I'll wait till the HTL-version will be released.
The HTL Colossus is on track to be in the next MVPs release.
That are great news :eek2:
-
The GTT Elysium:
(http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/4092/gttelysium.png)
-
Looks like there's a spotlight on that ship.
-
:doubt:
Sorry, that just doesn't look like an improvement... granted part of the issue is the normal maps, but it looks like tinfoil now.
-
I haven't editted the Normal-Map if you want to say that. :nervous:
It looks like i've eddited that, but it's still the original by FSU (http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/985/transport0101normal.png)...:D
I could post the Elysium without the Normal-Map if you don't trust me :sigh:
-
See, but the shine and normal need to work together... I know you aren't changing the normal.
However, your shine looks bad with that normal and as such, it isn't an improvement...
-
Part of the thing is the Elysium has fairly bad normal maps anyway, it really could use a remade normal map.