|
|
Texture sizes in Workspace
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
Texture sizes in Workspace // Tech Forum
Post by jayr // Sep 1, 2008, 10:20pm
|
jayr
Total Posts: 1074
|
I've been noticing a bit of a problem with the workspace lately, or at least how i'm using (or abusing) it.
When i have blank, default texture objects it's fine, but as i add my textures it slows to a crawl. might not be much of a surprise really, image maps take up more memory than just a plain colour, but it does give me a huge problem.
If i cant navigate a scene when my textures are applied the workspace becomes a bit of a hinderance.
i've already set the tex res for workspace to 32x32 but it doesn't look any different. I should point out that i'm looking more for results with the offline renderers rather than realtime ones.
So, my question is, how do i get around it? Is there an ideal size for textures for use in the workspace?
the ones i've been using are about 1500px wide and maybe 800-1000 high, is this a stupid size? I know 2000px is the limit for truespace so would i get better results in workspace and in my renders if i backed it down a bit.
What is a good size for a texture that's to be rendered with lightworks or vray? A lot of tutorials i read just say 'it depends on how manpixels it'll take up on the final render', if thats true i'd have thought the bigger the better.
i should also mention my video card is a radeon x1300, rest of system specs below |
Post by W!ZARD // Sep 2, 2008, 5:06am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
I'm not sure about this - I've always found that what size image you use depends quite a lot on what you use the image for - so for a sky dome or a background plate or a larger surface seen reasonably closely I would use as high a resolution as I could - for something in the distance or something small (like a characters eye for example) I would use very small images.
A lot depends also on the final resolution you are wanting to render at - if your final render is at 1024x 768 for example a 2000x2000 texture image won't reveal all the detain it holds anyway (unless of course you are very close to it).
Generally any animations you render will tend to be smaller overall image resolution so you can often use lower res images there.
As a rule of thumb I aim to have the texture look as sharp as possible but also remember that the way the texture is lit in the scene will also have a bearing - a heavily detailed hi res texture on a surface that is in dark shadow is nice if your hardware/software can deal with it effectively but much of that detail can be lost.
Finally I would be wondering about your graphics card - again I'm no expert but IIRC the x1300 is an older lower end card. The rest of your machine sounds fine to my (only partly knowledgeable) ears. I'm sure someone will chime in if what I'm saying is criminally misleading!!
HTH |
Post by trueBlue // Sep 2, 2008, 5:18am
|
trueBlue
Total Posts: 1761
|
Here is an insert from the D3DViewSettings.xml file with regards to Hardware settings which you can find in Workspace in the bottom toolbar right most icon stack.
<SHADER_MAX_VERSION Value="default" />
- <!-- TEXTURE_SIZE_SCALE specifies the ratio which will be used to scale down all textures.
New texture size is determined by dividion with this number. For example if
value is 4 then 512x512 texture is scaled down to 128x128 (512/4 = 128).
Smaller textures produce less memory usage and higher performance of rendering.
Following values are valid:
"default" - textures are not scaled down.
"<num>" - i.e. "4". All textures will be scaled down with the ratio <num>.
Examples of <num> are 2, 4, 8, 16, 32.
Most graphics card allow only power-of-two textures so use just power of two dividers.
-->
<TEXTURE_SIZE_SCALE Value="default" />
- <!-- TEXTURE_SIZE_MAX specifies the maximum allowed texture size.
All textures with size greater than specified value (after texture ratio is applied)
will be scaled down to this size.
Smaller textures produce less memory usage and higher performance of rendering.
Following values are valid:
"default" - the original resolution is used for each texture.
"<num>" - i.e. "256". All textures with size greater than <num> are scaled down to <num>.
Examples of <num> are 4096, 2048, 1024, 512, 256, 128, 64.
Most graphics card allow only power-of-two textures. |
Post by jayr // Sep 2, 2008, 7:18am
|
jayr
Total Posts: 1074
|
thanks trueblue, thant seems to have done the job! I remember seeing that panel when i first got 7.5 but forgot about it, don't think i really appreciated what it was for when i knew it was there! :rolleyes:
Wizard, my graphics card is a few years old now, got it when oblivion came out, thinking of replaceing it soon but i can't afford to go too overboard on a new one! |
Post by W!ZARD // Sep 2, 2008, 7:33am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Wizard, my graphics card is a few years old now, got it when oblivion came out, thinking of replaceing it soon but i can't afford to go too overboard on a new one!
Fortunately they've dropped in price quite considerably so you should be able to get something reasonable without having to sell a kidney on the black market!;) |
Post by noko // Sep 2, 2008, 7:43am
|
noko
Total Posts: 684
|
As a quick note, the Display option panel on the modeler side of tS Tex res for Workspace setting controls the Bridge texture transfer resolutions from modeler to Workspace. So if you do work in modeler and bridge it over to the WS, setting texture res to 32x32 will do just that. The Workspace HW settings controls actual WS texture settings inside of WS. |
Post by jayr // Sep 2, 2008, 10:30am
|
jayr
Total Posts: 1074
|
Fortunately they've dropped in price quite considerably so you should be able to get something reasonable without having to sell a kidney on the black market!;)
just ordered an Nvidia GeForce 9600GT 1GB PCIE so i think i'll be fine for a while now :D |
Post by RichLevy // Sep 2, 2008, 11:46am
|
RichLevy
Total Posts: 1140
|
Thanks Noko and Tru for the info, that cleared up some things I was running into... I should know this stuff :confused:, I am way behind the curve though.
Thanks again
Rich |
Post by W!ZARD // Sep 3, 2008, 3:35pm
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
just ordered an Nvidia GeForce 9600GT 1GB PCIE so i think i'll be fine for a while now :D
Nice - I have the GeForce 8600GT 512mb and tS rocks on that.
I imagine tS will thrive with a whole gig of video RAM! |
Post by jayr // Sep 4, 2008, 1:01am
|
jayr
Total Posts: 1074
|
it does run much better although the card is a beast! i had to move my hard-drive to fit it in the case! |
|
