JK2 [JAEnhanced] High Res Textures

[Tempust85]

Really need a better renderer to make this project reach it's full potential.

[Syko]

@@Mr.Zz I am closing this project since I don't have the time to continue working on it and since higher res textures are not really necessary. If you want to work on it though you are welcome to use the textures I have already created.

[Mr.Zz]

Oh, ok that's sad news but I surely understand, my time is currently very limited too. I'll probably do that and also implement some textures I already did for other projects, so I will continue my work on JKA and then shift to JKO.

[Master Ridley]

I made a little something for this, though I don't think I'm going to continue working on this anytime soon (busy with other things, sadly…might make a few more…).

Original switch2.jpg:

 

Mine:

 

Original switch3.jpg:

 

Mine:

 

So, what do you think?

Also, I'm also working on switch_broken.jpg and I've done all the light sources. (Haven't tested them in-game yet.)

[Tempust85]

My thoughts:

 

- what's with the galvanised look of most things?

- the two large vertical boxes shouldn't have any beveling like the original

- edges look too sharp, try smoothing them just a tad for a more realistic look

- the knobs don't look real enough for my liking, try toning down the highlights/shadows

- the blue boxes look more like clouds rather than buttons with a small amount of glossy shine on them

- highlights for the center box with the lever-like thing are too much, tone them down a bit

- that grey circle in a box thing below the center box looks unfinished

 

1024x1024 is too big for a small switch IMO, 512x512 would do it nicely

[Botdra]

My thoughts:

 

- what's with the galvanised look of most things?

- the two large vertical boxes shouldn't have any beveling like the original

- edges look too sharp, try smoothing them just a tad for a more realistic look

- the knobs don't look real enough for my liking, try toning down the highlights/shadows

- the blue boxes look more like clouds rather than buttons with a small amount of glossy shine on them

- highlights for the center box with the lever-like thing are too much, tone them down a bit

- that grey circle in a box thing below the center box looks unfinished

 

1024x1024 is too big for a small switch IMO, 512x512 would do it nicely

 

 

For the most part, it's not much tougher to do a texture in 1024 than it is to make it in 512. If he wants to do it, I won't complain. I sure hope no one here will have issues running these textures at 1024 instead of 512.

[Master Ridley]

Thanks for the reply DT85.

 

- what's with the galvanised look of most things?

The original had a galvanized look to it as well (at least, to me it did), only very toned down and blurry.

 

- the two large vertical boxes shouldn't have any beveling like the original

Originally, that's what I was going for but I decided to take some artistic license on that detail. Tinted glass so to speak. No detail at all in the original. They were just pitch black beforehand.
 

- edges look too sharp, try smoothing them just a tad for a more realistic look

All the edges? Which edges to be precise because I can only think of some of the lighting and shadows?
 

- the knobs don't look real enough for my liking, try toning down the highlights/shadows

The highlights and shadows were like such on the original, but I agree. I'll also try to add some more detail.
 

- the blue boxes look more like clouds rather than buttons with a small amount of glossy shine on them

I was attempting to copy something on the original, but I can try playing with the levels and see what that accomplishes.
 

- highlights for the center box with the lever-like thing are too much, tone them down a bit

Now that you mention it… Definitely a must.
 

- that grey circle in a box thing below the center box looks unfinished

I thought so too. What would you recommend? Playing around with the shading? The need of more detail?

[Tempust85]

All the edges? Which edges to be precise because I can only think of some of the lighting and shadows?

 

 

These, I recommend making them less sharp.

 

 

I thought so too. What would you recommend? Playing around with the shading? The need of more detail?

 

Hmm, play around with the color of it (maybe a lighter color) and the intensity of the shadowing.

 

 

A suggestion for the galvanised look, keep it but make it alot more larger than so small.

[Corto]

I'm starting to believe nobody gives a donkey's ass about my educated opinions. Alright. Keep wasting your time and effort doing things the wrong way. Keep maxing out the texture space only to put the same amount of detail and with only sharper edges as the high point of these new "high resolution" textures. Fortunately, there're a couple of guys here who also talk sense, but nobody's listening them either, so I'm not talking this personally =).

[ChalklYne]

lmao i care!  i do

[Botdra]

I'm starting to believe nobody gives a donkey's ass about my educated opinions. Alright. Keep wasting your time and effort doing things the wrong way. Keep maxing out the texture space only to put the same amount of detail and with only sharper edges as the high point of these new "high resolution" textures. Fortunately, there're a couple of guys here who also talk sense, but nobody's listening them either, so I'm not talking this personally =).

 

As if you're the only one with an educated opinion here?

[Corto]

No, I'm telling you. I'm not the only one who has an educated opinion, but the guys making this textures seem to be ignoring us like if we were trying to sabotage their project. They're doing doing it by themselves. This project would make much more sense if they started working on those textures which are horribly washed out in game right now and choosing a new texture size based on the amount of space they have to cover, as opposed to just making them unnecessarily huge. Also, instead of making the same exact texture with sharper edges they should re imagine those parts that look overly simple because of the small texture space the original texture has. High definition is not about higher resolutions alone, is about using a higher resolution to add much more detail.

[Botdra]

No, I'm telling you. I'm not the only one who has an educated opinion, but the guys making this textures seem to be ignoring us like if we were trying to sabotage their project. They're doing doing it by themselves. This project would make much more sense if they started working on those textures which are horribly washed out in game right now and choosing a new texture size based on the amount of space they have to cover, as opposed to just making them unnecessarily huge. Also, instead of making the same exact texture with sharper edges they should re imagine those parts that look overly simple because of the small texture space the original texture has. High definition is not about higher resolutions alone, is about using a higher resolution to add much more detail.

 

Chill out man, I'm just saying there's more important things in life than if some guys who make textures for a 10 year old game are listening to you in a thread on a forum that only a handful of people go to. You're right, but it's not a big deal.

[Corto]

Clearly one of us is in the wrong forum then. I'll try to chill out from now on. Thanks for the advice.

[minilogoguy18]

^I actually left the SWBF2 modding community because of that, I think everyone was told too much by their mommies that they were angels that were perfect.

[Syko]

In any case. I completely see Corto's point. I'm not sure why I'm seeing a giant version of a texture with no additional detailing. Especially that small switch panel. I have no idea why you'd need to make it that huge to begin with.

 

Looking back I agree. I remember when I made the first of these high-res textures and I honestly though there was little to no improvement. I just wanted to post here to see what people thought of it, but the idea got pretty popular and I think I got lost in it. Still, either way I think it was a good way of practicing Photoshop skills. 

 

No, I'm telling you. I'm not the only one who has an educated opinion, but the guys making this textures seem to be ignoring us like if we were trying to sabotage their project. They're doing doing it by themselves. This project would make much more sense if they started working on those textures which are horribly washed out in game right now and choosing a new texture size based on the amount of space they have to cover, as opposed to just making them unnecessarily huge. Also, instead of making the same exact texture with sharper edges they should re imagine those parts that look overly simple because of the small texture space the original texture has. High definition is not about higher resolutions alone, is about using a higher resolution to add much more detail.

 

Well, I took you're advice and closed the project. I didn't ask Master Ridley to help with this, so he's doing this of his own accord. 

 

Meh, just do what I do and don't bother. Clearly some people need help, but there are a bunch of people waiting to jump down your throat if your feedback is even slightly not filled with rainbows and unicorns.

 

Getting off topic here, but...I do agree with this to an extent, but criticism should be handled with respect and should always be constructive. I also think there's a tendency for some of us to do the opposite of this and over-criticize. I think it's good to point out positive things as well as negative things, as a lot of negative feedback can get frustrating at times. One example is clear on the previous page. The first post after Master Ridley's texture is 7 different criticisms of the texture by DT. While I believe they are all valid, I would think it would be somewhat frustrating for someone who just spent several hours working on a texture to post it here only to intense scrutiny. Again, all of DTs points are very valid and I'm sure will be helpful to crafting another version, but finding at least 1 thing positive about it might make a lot of criticism seem a bit less offensive. Of course, praising something that's crap and over-complimenting it shouldn't be done either. This texture is obviously not that though and I think it is a good start. It is sort of a waste though since the higher resolution isn't going to really improve anything visually, as Corto said.

[Master Ridley]

I'm only really doing it for practice with texturing itself, not for an actual project.

[Botdra]

Clearly one of us is in the wrong forum then. I'll try to chill out from now on. Thanks for the advice.

 

Meh, just do what I do and don't bother. Clearly some people need help, but there are a bunch of people waiting to jump down your throat if your feedback is even slightly not filled with rainbows and unicorns.

 

The best you can do is state your opinion and just leave it at that. If they don't listen to you, don't make it your problem.

[Mr.Zz]

Meh, just do what I do and don't bother. Clearly some people need help, but there are a bunch of people waiting to jump down your throat if your feedback is even slightly not filled with rainbows and unicorns.

 

 

I too think that criticism is part of all of our creative work. It is essential.

 

Usually a mod is done for the players e.g. other people not yourself, so it is important to listen to their feedback even if it's bad. And that is not easy. It's difficult not to take things personally.

 

I had a small "confrontation" with MoonDog some time ago concerning the Taspir pack of my mod. I hope that didn't leave a rift between us? I read throgh it again recently and it does semm I took things alittle bit personally back then. You definitely had a point with the scratches being overdone and looking somehow like threads. But that's the point of feedback and I'm always improving hings - in this case i focused on improving the way i edit the metal textures for the new levels of pack 0.3. And that's what I did from the start on always rethinking the way i improve the pack.

Thank you for your honest feedback and criticism MoonDog.

I definitely understand the point of those who say just simply uprezzing texture resolution doesn't really improve much - sure. But it does make the game look more "clear/crisp" and the drawbacks of the bad original resolution are reduced which makes the game more visually appealing in my opinion. I personally think that completely reworking every texture in high resolution from scratch is unnecessary and a lot of good useable working power "blown in the wind". That's why I replace textures which just simply look too unrealistic, and others i upscale while also adding a lot of detail through filters and overlay-procedures.

 

I'm looking forward to the day some genius implements normal mapping in JKA - my pack ciould easily be converted to a Normal-map pack, there are some awesome programs like crazymbump or alternatives which really achieve awesome results converting 2d textures to normal maps.

 

Also it would be totally awesome if we used our time for a more creative project than retexturing, but there's gotta be a start somewhere then I thoght a lot about adding the texture packs to re-modeled models with higher poly-count an better effects which would combine to a nice graphical overhaul pack.

 

I'm definitely listening to what people have to say. So much great minds here.

 

Regards

[Tempust85]

I'm looking forward to the day some genius implements normal mapping in JKA - my pack ciould easily be converted to a Normal-map pack, there are some awesome programs like crazymbump or alternatives which really achieve awesome results converting 2d textures to normal maps.

 

You'd still need to re-work the diffuse to remove most (in some cases, all) of the simulated lighting, normal mapping will take care of it (if crazybump's/nDo2's settings are properly done). That, and the maps themselves will need to be re-built with new lighting.

[Mr.Zz]

You'd still need to re-work the diffuse to remove most (in some cases, all) of the simulated lighting, normal mapping will take care of it (if crazybump's/nDo2's settings are properly done). That, and the maps themselves will need to be re-built with new lighting.

 

But do you really need to re-work the textures? I mean the lighting situation of the maps would stay similar, which may fit to the lighting already on the original 2d textures - which would get enhanced to look more realistic when using normal- specular- and parallax mapping, right?

Either way it would still be a lot of work though.

[Xycaleth]

I think what DT is trying to say is that existing textures already have extra shadowing and highlights added to them to give them some depth to account for the lack of any form of bump mapping (i use this term to include normal, parallax, displacement, etc. mapping). By introducing bump mapping, these textures would need to have this simulated lighting/shadowing taken out to look good. For example, in the case that a player moves their lightsaber near the texture, the lighting conditions would change.

[Syko]

A bit more work has been done on this. 

 

 

 

That pic was a bit too dark.

 

 

Any progress on normal mapping coders? Or any other graphic enhancement code? @@eezstreet @@ensiform @@Xycaleth

[afi]

Looks great

[eezstreet]

See: rd-rend2 thread in OpenJK.