64K/128K Specular Map Blue Marble Next Generation VT PNG !

[fsgregs]

Guys:

Thanks for all the info. Lonehiker, thanks for the detailed instructions on using the nvidia dds converter. I will try to convert to dds as above. That said, ... how is anyone's system running the 64k png textures at all? Like I said, my system should be plenty fast enough and it clearly is not!

Fightspit, these textures are yours. Are you ... or anyone else using the PNG textures getting decent frame rates as you move around on the screen? If so, what rates are you getting and what is your secret?



Frank

[cartrite]

I may be wrong but I think most of the quality issues that involved dxt5 were with normalmaps , not the main textures. The gain in performance was thought to outweigh the quality loss. If a texture has such poor performance that locks a computer up, well.........
cartrite

[LoneHiker]

I know the BMNG VT tiles are in PNG which provide the best quality of the tiles but decrease a lot of fps probably.

On my modest system DDS makes the difference between being able to view a 64K set at high oblique/low altitude and not being able to.

I hesitate to do a BMNG in DDS version but I don't know if DXT5 (with specific compresion ?) get the same result than PNG.
What do you think ?

Obviously PNG is not going to have any image quality issues. But honestly, I can't see any practical difference in the 64K DDS DXT5 set I'm working on, other than at extreme zoom on flat color water areas. And I'm talking about being so close that everything is very blurry. A DDS version will be a much larger upload/download, however.

Lone

[LoneHiker]

I know the BMNG VT tiles are in PNG which provide the best quality of the tiles but decrease a lot of fps probably.
I hesitate to do a BMNG in DDS version but I don't know if DXT5 (with specific compresion ?) get the same result than PNG.
What do you think ?

BTW, I didn't mean to sound too critical in my original post. I understand adding a specular mask to your VT set, creating the tiles and uploading it all again is a major undertaking. Thanks for all your contributions.

Lone

[LoneHiker]

It's been a while since I did this and the computer I did it on only had 512 mb ram but I could't run the ommand "nvdxt -all -deep" if the folder I ran it on had a total size being too large. I was also converting smaller 512x512 tiles.

I ran nvDXT on 512 tiles at a time (1024 x 1024) without any problems. However, I did it all in one folder, unlike my example. If nvDXT balks one can divide the files into subfolders and run the program one folder at a time as you suggest and use the following command:

nvdxt -file c:\temp\subfolder1\*.* -outsamedir -dxt1 -nmips 4 -sharpenMethod SharpenMedium -quality_normal

Lone

[cartrite]

Guys:

Thanks for all the info. Lonehiker, thanks for the detailed instructions on using the nvidia dds converter. I will try to convert to dds as above. That said, ... how is anyone's system running the 64k png textures at all? Like I said, my system should be plenty fast enough and it clearly is not!

Fightspit, these textures are yours. Are you ... or anyone else using the PNG textures getting decent frame rates as you move around on the screen? If so, what rates are you getting and what is your secret?



Frank

I have NO problems running mine on older cvs versions or the official 1.4.1 version of Celestia. Mine are 1k tiles though and are in png format. With only the 64k texture running and a 32k VT cloudmap I get about 30fps. When I enabled the normalmap it would slow down some. With the First BMNG I did, October, I removed all the ocean tiles in the highest folders. That is a 512x512 tile VT so I deleted all files that were alll ocean water for levels 4, 5 and 6.

[cartrite]

It's been a while since I did this and the computer I did it on only had 512 mb ram but I could't run the ommand "nvdxt -all -deep" if the folder I ran it on had a total size being too large. I was also converting smaller 512x512 tiles.

I ran nvDXT on 512 tiles at a time (1024 x 1024) without any problems. However, I did it all in one folder, unlike my example. If nvDXT balks one can divide the files into subfolders and run the program one folder at a time as you suggest and use the following command:

nvdxt -file c:\temp\subfolder1\*.* -outsamedir -dxt1 -nmips 4 -sharpenMethod SharpenMedium -quality_normal

Lone

That's what I did but I wrote a .bat file to do. So everytime it finished a folder nvdxt cleared it's memory.

[Fightspit]

Guys:

Thanks for all the info. Lonehiker, thanks for the detailed instructions on using the nvidia dds converter. I will try to convert to dds as above. That said, ... how is anyone's system running the 64k png textures at all? Like I said, my system should be plenty fast enough and it clearly is not!

Fightspit, these textures are yours. Are you ... or anyone else using the PNG textures getting decent frame rates as you move around on the screen? If so, what rates are you getting and what is your secret?



Frank

In fact, when I using only the BMNG (128K) base texture, there isn't any problems for me but I use a lot of memory ( 2GB like cartrite) and I have also a fast hard disk (raptor 74.5 GB 10000 RPM SATA !) that is why I get ~ 35, 40 fps.
So, a fast computer (not only a super graphic card ) is very recommanded

[cartrite]

Here are a couple of test shots I just took using the 1.4.1 Gnome version installed by the auto-package installer. A few things to note are that most if not all level 4 and 5 tiles that were only oceans, (that is in my case, tiles that had a pixel value of 0x030f24 ) were deleted.
My ram usage was about 1.5 GB and there as no normalmap. I as using a Maxtor 200 gb ide drive with ultra 133 dma.

To delete those files I inspected each with the thumbnails set to extra large on my linux system , selected those with no land visible and zapped em.





Another test shot with a 64k normalmap using CVS version KDE somehere around Sun May 7 08:56:31 2006.



I don't think your computer should be locking up though. There may be something else going on. You may want to check your celestia.cfg file and make sure your setting for

# AntialiasingSamples 4

is not set too high.

Yet another EDIT: My machine locks up too when my ram gets filled up. That's probally the problem. A ram upgrade should do the trick. I don't think dds will help. That may use more ram. ??? 2K tiles will consume a lot of memory no matter what format you use.

cartrite

[ANDREA]

...run a file conversion program called nvDXT to batch convert PNG to Nvidia-friendly DDS format.
nvdxt -all -deep c:\temp -outsamedir -dxt1 -nmips 4 -sharpenMethod SharpenMedium -quality_normal
Normal maps can also be converted to DDS. . Lone

LoneHiker, thank you very much for your VERY detailed info, it works perfectly, I'm finishing the conversion of all Fightspit's 128 k VT Earth, and later on I will do the same for the normalmap.
I have just a doubt: why dxt1 and not dxt3 or something else?
I have in my memory something about the advantages of the latter versus the former, am I wrong?
Thanks a lot.
Bye

Andrea

[cartrite]

...run a file conversion program called nvDXT to batch convert PNG to Nvidia-friendly DDS format.
nvdxt -all -deep c:\temp -outsamedir -dxt1 -nmips 4 -sharpenMethod SharpenMedium -quality_normal
Normal maps can also be converted to DDS. . Lone

LoneHiker, thank you very much for your VERY detailed info, it works perfectly, I'm finishing the conversion of all Fightspit's 128 k VT Earth, and later on I will do the same for the normalmap.
I have just a doubt: why dxt1 and not dxt3 or something else?
I have in my memory something about the advantages of the latter versus the former, am I wrong?
Thanks a lot.
Bye

Andrea

If you are planning to use the normalmaps for some time to come, ie after the release of 1.5.0, I would take a look at this before converting to a dds format. The normalmap will have to be remapped. Incase you didn't know that already.
http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic ... 6195#76195
cartrite

[ANDREA]

I have just a doubt: why dxt1 and not dxt3 or something else?
Thanks a lot. Bye Andrea

If you are planning to use the normalmaps for some time to come, ie after the release of 1.5.0, I would take a look at this before converting to a dds format. The normalmap will have to be remapped. Incase you didn't know that already.
http://www.celestiaproject.net/forum/viewtopic ... 6195#76195
cartrite

Cartrite, I followed the thread, but waiting for the 1.5.0 final release and the uploading of Fridger's nmtools (and then I'll convert to the -dxt5 format), actually I need to use 1.4.1 with normalmaps.
So I only need to know why the suggested format is dxt1 instead of dxt3.
Can you solve my doubt, please?
Thanks a lot.
Bye

Andrea

[cartrite]

Andrea, I think there is something about dxt1 not being able to do something but right now I can't remember what. That's why everybody says to use dxt3. I think. From what I remember there was a dxt1c format or something like that.

Texture Format Default DXT3:
-dxt1c : DXT1 (color only)
-dxt1a : DXT1 (one bit alpha)
-dxt3 : DXT3
-dxt5 : DXT5

That was taken from nvDXT.pdf which was part of the installation.
I think it has to do with the 1 bit alpha. If you have a specmap in the alpha channel, that might mess things up? Also , I may be wrong, but dxt1c can't have an alpha channel?

I don't know why he suggested dxt1. That's Lone Hiker's question to answer.

gazillionth Edit Mabey, it's possible, he suggested it because, since Fightspits BMNG texture doesn't have a specmap in the alpha channel, dxt1c would be alright.

cartrite

[LoneHiker]

I have just a doubt: why dxt1 and not dxt3 or something else?

I suggested DXT1 because the VTs have no alpha data (as Cartrite correctly surmised). But you are also right, there is a quality difference between DXT1 and DXT3/DXT5. It's particularly noticeable in flat ocean color areas at extreme zoom where it takes the form of ordered dithering. It's less noticeable, or not noticeable at all, in most land areas.

If it's an issue then by all means use DXT3 or DXT5. I think for images with no alpha DXT3 and DXT5 will produce the same result. File size will increase significantly, however

For alphas with smooth tonal transitions use DXT5. For alphas with large areas of solid black and solid white with only small areas of gray between the two use DXT3.

Lone

[ANDREA]

I have just a doubt: why dxt1 and not dxt3 or something else?

I suggested DXT1 because the VTs have no alpha data (as Cartrite correctly surmised). But you are also right, there is a quality difference between DXT1 and DXT3/DXT5.
If it's an issue then by all means use DXT3 or DXT5. I think for images with no alpha DXT3 and DXT5 will produce the same result. File size will increase significantly, however
For alphas with smooth tonal transitions use DXT5. For alphas with large areas of solid black and solid white with only small areas of gray between the two use DXT3.
Lone

Thank you LoneHicker, now it's very clear.
Bye

Andrea

[LotharS]

I have just a doubt: why dxt1 and not dxt3 or something else?

I suggested DXT1 because the VTs have no alpha data (as Cartrite correctly surmised). But you are also right, there is a quality difference between DXT1 and DXT3/DXT5. It's particularly noticeable in flat ocean color areas at extreme zoom where it takes the form of ordered dithering. It's less noticeable, or not noticeable at all, in most land areas.

If it's an issue then by all means use DXT3 or DXT5. I think for images with no alpha DXT3 and DXT5 will produce the same result. File size will increase significantly, however

For alphas with smooth tonal transitions use DXT5. For alphas with large areas of solid black and solid white with only small areas of gray between the two use DXT3.

Lone

Maybe I'm a bit dense but I didn't notice any compression at all. I tried the conversion on the level1 files and with dxt1, the size was 2.6 mb and with dxt3, it was 5.3 mb for *every* converted file.
I used the command

C:\Programme\NVIDIA Corporation\DDS Utilities>nvdxt -all -deep C:\temp\BMNG\textures\hires\BMNG\level1 -outsamedir -overwrite -dxt1 -nmips 4 -quick

with the newest nvidia tools (version 8.12 from August 2006). Did I miss something? Or is there another magic switch to get compression to work?

[cartrite]

Maybe I'm a bit dense but I didn't notice any compression at all. I tried the conversion on the level1 files and with dxt1, the size was 2.6 mb and with dxt3, it was 5.3 mb for *every* converted file.

Try using no compression and see what the size of the file is then. DDS files are larger then other formats but are easier on the graphics card. Also mipmaps are sometimes generated. A mipmap? A mipmap can be thought of as virtual texture inside a texture. Depending on the distance from the object your veiwing, the smallest mipmap would be used instead of the full texture. This increases performance. This also increases the file size though.

Assuming your converting from png to dds. The dds files will be larger then the png files if mipmaps are used or not. I just seen that your command included -nmips.

[LoneHiker]

Maybe I'm a bit dense but I didn't notice any compression at all. I tried the conversion on the level1 files and with dxt1, the size was 2.6 mb and with dxt3, it was 5.3 mb for *every* converted file.
I used the command

C:\Programme\NVIDIA Corporation\DDS Utilities>nvdxt -all -deep C:\temp\BMNG\textures\hires\BMNG\level1 -outsamedir -overwrite -dxt1 -nmips 4 -quick

with the newest nvidia tools (version 8.12 from August 2006). Did I miss something? Or is there another magic switch to get compression to work?

I'm not sure I understand your complaint (for lack of a better word) . Are you trying to get a smaller DXT3 file size?

Lone

[LotharS]

Are you trying to get a smaller DXT3 file size?

Lone

Of course my aim is to minimize disk usage.
Let me expand a bit on my problem of understanding. I assume that the switch -quick/-quality_normal/-quality_highest is used to turn on compression (correct me if I'm wrong). Then I would expect that with different source file sizes, also the target file sizes would differ. But this is not the case (see list below). All dds file sizes are the same. So either I'm doing something wrong or "compression" means something else than I expect

2.785.408 tx_0_0.dds
3.146.108 tx_0_0.png
2.785.408 tx_0_1.dds
568.770 tx_0_1.png
2.785.408 tx_1_0.dds
2.781.312 tx_1_0.png
2.785.408 tx_1_1.dds
2.512.357 tx_1_1.png
2.785.408 tx_2_0.dds
5.166.365 tx_2_0.png
2.785.408 tx_2_1.dds
1.858.949 tx_2_1.png
2.785.408 tx_3_0.dds
3.618.339 tx_3_0.png
2.785.408 tx_3_1.dds
2.322.031 tx_3_1.png

[cartrite]

to compress dds files with nvdxt the format options -dxt1c, dxt3 or dxt5 is what is compressing them. dxt5 has the best compression i think. -u888 is no compression.
dds will have larger file sizes than png but png files are rendered slower. If your trying to save diskspace the format to use would be jpg.

2.785.408 tx_0_0.dds
3.146.108 tx_0_0.png
2.785.408 tx_0_1.dds
568.770 tx_0_1.png
2.785.408 tx_1_0.dds
2.781.312 tx_1_0.png
2.785.408 tx_1_1.dds
2.512.357 tx_1_1.png
2.785.408 tx_2_0.dds
5.166.365 tx_2_0.png
2.785.408 tx_2_1.dds
1.858.949 tx_2_1.png
2.785.408 tx_3_0.dds
3.618.339 tx_3_0.png
2.785.408 tx_3_1.dds
2.322.031 tx_3_1.png

These different file sizes have a lot to do with the information contained in the files. Png and dds compress differently. The file tx_0_1 is mostly ocean i think. That is easily compressed with png because a lot of the pixels are the same value. DDS seems to compress by file size and not the pixel values. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

Correction: It seems that dxt5 uses 4:1 compression and dxt1 uses 6:1 compression

The DXT1 format compresses RGB images by a factor of 6:1, for an average of 4 bits per texel

The DXT5 format compresses an RGBA image by a factor of 4:1, using a byte per texel on average

quotes taken from NVSDK Bump_Map_Compression.pdf
DXT1 would probally get the best compression. Not sure about dxt3