newbie VT question

FarGetaNik · Post #21by **FarGetaNik** » 26.04.2018, 13:44

I am able to create the VT with larger tiles so that the resolution stays at 92k. But while scrolling through the tiles I noticed that the only visible color is from artifacts. The rest is basically greyscale, with some patches having a hue that can be made visible by strongly boosting the saturation. Personally I don't see a point in using this texture, but I can still share it as soon as its done.

Added after 3 hours 29 minutes:
I uploaded the VT to my google drive: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Cnw65nq8pk5fjp7oGul9RlevjD-XJ9KL/view?usp=sharing
A 6GB monster...

CM1215 · Post #22by **CM1215** » 28.04.2018, 13:07

Well...the re-composition process did spam errors at me the whole way through, but it appeared the process was still going on, so I ignored the errors. Another possibility, due to the high-contrast nature of the 92k texture the color is quite difficult to see...

CM1215 · Post #23by **CM1215** » 02.05.2018, 13:18

Also...I just tried the VT and it doesn't want to render. Mercury appears as a white sphere with nothing but the normal map that I am using. Perhaps 92k is too unusual a dimension to work properly.

Post #24by **selden** » 02.05.2018, 14:01

VTs must be a power of two on their sides -- e.g. the equivalent of 128Kx64K, not 92Kx46K.

I assumed this was taken into account because of the comment "am able to create the VT with larger tiles" but must have misunderstood.

FarGetaNik · Post #25by **FarGetaNik** » 02.05.2018, 20:07

CM1215, did you check if the directories were right? I've just quickly put everything together using my alternate surface VT template.

selden, no I actually created a 92k VT with tiles not being a power of 2 for CM2015's request. If there is no way Celestia would handle that right now it would explain his difficlties.

CM1215 · Post #26by **CM1215** » 03.05.2018, 01:17

FarGetaNik wrote:CM1215, did you check if the directories were right? I've just quickly put everything together using my alternate surface VT template.

Yes, and I edited your ssc file to modify Mercury rather than to create an alternate surface, but texture failed to render.. I even tried editing the solarsys.ssc file to use the texture, but it still wouldn't render.

I believe selden is right...VTs probably need to be a power of 2.

FarGetaNik · Post #27by **FarGetaNik** » 03.05.2018, 16:15

That's a shame. Are you still interested in 64k VT then?

CM1215 · Post #28by **CM1215** » 03.05.2018, 16:59

Yeah...I'd say I'd still be interested in the 64k. :biggrin:

FarGetaNik · Post #29by **FarGetaNik** » 10.05.2018, 11:01

I hope you can wait a few more days so I can try that procedure on my new computer

FarGetaNik · Post #30by **FarGetaNik** » 13.05.2018, 19:14

I finished the 64k version on my new computer. I got the texture tool to work quite easily, but kept running into problems using the pipe mechanism. It kept spouting out gibberish :insane:

Anyways here the VT https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WOTEgABwo-k3ZT30CsQaydQ87FmDHw8G/view?usp=sharing

CM1215 · Post #31by **CM1215** » 14.05.2018, 12:13

Something I didn't notice before on the texture...

FarGetaNik · Post #32by **FarGetaNik** » 14.05.2018, 15:22

that's what I've been mentioning before.

CM1215 · Post #33by **CM1215** » 14.05.2018, 21:01

FarGetaNik wrote:that's what I've been mentioning before.

Oh...perhaps this is what happened while GIMP spammed errors at me...I may need to retry it on the 64k as a single file.

FarGetaNik · Post #34by **FarGetaNik** » 15.05.2018, 14:50

Yes, I had these kind of issues with Gimp 2.9 before. I'm glad Gimp 2.10 is out now. Maybe I can handle this texture size now actually...

Added after 2 hours:
I managed to process the texture in 32k in a reasonable amount of time. I won't do 64k since this will take about 4 times as long considering the increased amount of data. Anyways here are my results:

The whole colorized texture

Close up at full resolution

Next up is creating a 32k VT out of this texture :smoke:

Gurren Lagann · Post #35by **Gurren Lagann** » 15.05.2018, 23:19

Cool! I would get it if my PC wasn't a potato and it did go Ultra Instinct again...

FarGetaNik · Post #36by **FarGetaNik** » 19.05.2018, 19:48

I'm done with the VTs for my 32k mercury color texture :smoke:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1y93_ohPJcENWzqh7WH9q73LrPzRnZP_B/view?usp=sharing

Limax7 · Post #37by **Limax7** » 07.07.2018, 18:27

Hi.
I have problem with create VT from png 8192x4096 image (color image without alpha)

I downloaded Fxtools and i don't know how to do that. I can't convert to bin

Maybe I don't must convert to bin ?
What command to windows cmd I must use ?

Adam

FarGetaNik · Post #38by **FarGetaNik** » 07.07.2018, 20:09

Limax7, creating VT's is not an easy task. Can you explain exactly what is the problem you run into? Did you successfully install the texture tools and are you able to run them in the command prompt? For converting an png image to a bin file you would run this command:

Code: Select all

png2bin < texturefile.png > texturefile.bin

I'd suggest using the pipe mechanism tho if you're intending to create a VT and not just a binary file, but this would be the next step after making sure everything works correctly.

Limax7 · Post #39by **Limax7** » 08.07.2018, 14:15

Report this post

Post #38by FarGetaNik » Yesterday, 22:09
Limax7, creating VT's is not an easy task. Can you explain exactly what is the problem you run into? Did you successfully install the texture tools and are you able to run them in the command prompt? For converting an png image to a bin file you would run this command:

Code: Select all
png2bin < texturefile.png > texturefile.bin

I'd suggest using the pipe mechanism tho if you're intending to create a VT and not just a binary file, but this would be the next step after making sure everything works correctly.

Thank you. That command works fine. I use bat file to convert png and another bat to tile file.