Author Topic: Official HR4 (High-Resolution, 4x) Texture Pack - WIP (Read 141543 times)

MyeRs · « **Reply #20 on:** March 12, 2011, 02:23:35 PM »

Scale down the textures.

I like most of the metal's in your pack, as well as the boxes. But, you should use a smoothing filter on all your wood planks because they look noisy and unrealistic.

The barrel sides are really nice.

I think it was more your rock walls and grasses that needed to be scaled down. But I don't think you've worked on them that much yet. 'rrock1_2 and rocks19_1' are the main ones that I looked at. (more so Rocks19_1 and the grasses)

---- If this becomes a mandatory pack, are we going to be able to scale the textures to our liking?

Last comment --- I know you have not touched this yet, but please try to improve on the wwall1_1.jpg texture. It's been around for a while and most packs use the less detailed version of it instead of the one in your pack.

T3RR0R15T · « **Reply #21 on:** March 12, 2011, 03:37:57 PM »

I dont think, rrock1_2 and rocks19_1 are so bad.

The wwall1_1 texture itself is good, but it doesn't look good ingame. It need to be changed completely. I had this one before, maybe something similar to that one would be nice.

What do you think about my two versions of "metal2_5" and "metal5_8" jitspoe?

Another thing 1: When you make the top of the barrels, can you please change the barrels too? In my opinion, they have too much slime and i would like to see a rusty border on the ground.

Another thing 2: I also didn't like the ?_metal1 texture. I've made another one from the dark places of the ?_tile textures. They are not perfect, but you can have a look, how it could be ingame. I like them much more than the actual ?_metal1: b_metal1, r_metal1, p_metal1, y_metal1

Narga · « **Reply #22 on:** March 13, 2011, 01:57:02 AM »

I downloaded the hr4_gpl.zip folder recently. The textures aren't as bad as I thought. In fact, I realised that just because there's a lot of detail, doesn't mean it isn't clean looking.

The only problem is the barrel top textures. They look like LD textures.

T3RR0R15T · « **Reply #23 on:** March 13, 2011, 06:59:44 AM »

Quote from: Narga on March 13, 2011, 01:57:02 AM

The only problem is the barrel top textures. They look like LD textures.

That are low resolution textures. Jitspoe is working on it, but the pack isn't complete atm.

jitspoe · « **Reply #24 on:** March 14, 2011, 09:58:59 PM »

MyeRs: I don't think scaling down the rock textures would look good. It would just look like a bumpy surface instead of a large rock wall, like most maps use them for. I tried to keep the scale pretty close to the originals. I don't really care if people scale them, but if we do a strict HR4 pack, then there will either be one set of textures that everybody can use, or just a few possible selections - you wouldn't be able to tweak textures (unless they became officially approved, or however we handle that).

Of course wwall1_1 could use more work, but I think it looks decent and true to the original (attached):

What, specifically, do you think needs work?

T3RR0R15T: I didn't reply earlier, but I made some changes to the metal2_8 and 2_8 to make them brighter. Any brighter than that, and it looks bad, I think. Your second one looks too greyscale. I'd like to have a little more color. See what you think of the new ones.

The _metal1 textures could stand to be redone, but I'm going to try to finish up the other textures before I get to them.

MyeRs · « **Reply #25 on:** March 15, 2011, 09:21:01 AM »

Quote from: jitspoe on March 14, 2011, 09:58:59 PM

MyeRs: I don't think scaling down the rock textures would look good. It would just look like a bumpy surface instead of a large rock wall, like most maps use them for. I tried to keep the scale pretty close to the originals. I don't really care if people scale them, but if we do a strict HR4 pack, then there will either be one set of textures that everybody can use, or just a few possible selections - you wouldn't be able to tweak textures (unless they became officially approved, or however we handle that).

Understood. It just was a huge difference from the basic 'non detailed' textures most people have been using. So it did take some time to adjust, but now it's a noticeable improvement over any other textures currently being used.

wwall1_1 -- I don't have any specific arguments against it, I just found it did not look nice in game, so I always used the less-detailed one in T3RR0R15T's post above. I'm going to put it back into my textures so I can give you better feedback later.

Also, the two grasses you posted in #paintball looked great in game!

Sporti · « **Reply #26 on:** March 15, 2011, 09:37:33 AM »

My opinion about these textures aren't good at the moment...
They are verry how i can say... strange...
I used it on airtime, ub cliff propaint pforest and it doesnt look good. But if jit is going to do it better i wll try it again but at this moment it is not possible to use it...

T3RR0R15T · « **Reply #27 on:** March 15, 2011, 10:33:30 AM »

Quote from: jitspoe on March 14, 2011, 09:58:59 PM

Of course wwall1_1 could use more work, but I think it looks decent and true to the original (attached):

Yes, it looks great as a hr4 texture from the original file. You said before, that you scaled down the original textures because of copyright things to get the actual low res textures. How do you made it for this texture? They (wwall1_1_original and the actual low res wwall1_1) are completely different (+different resolution). Or do you have another low res file with the same resolution as the original?

Original:

Low res:

If you remake it with the other resolution, can you maybe make it a bit more flat? It's often used with other flat textures (like stonewal) and should fit to it.

Quote from: Sporti on March 15, 2011, 09:37:33 AM

My opinion about these textures aren't good at the moment...
They are verry how i can say... strange...
I used it on airtime, ub cliff propaint pforest and it doesnt look good. But if jit is going to do it better i wll try it again but at this moment it is not possible to use it...

What exactly doesn't look good? Color, brightness, ...?

Edit: The brightness from the metal textures is much better now.

jitspoe · « **Reply #28 on:** March 15, 2011, 11:48:04 PM »

Sporti: I can't do it better with vague feedback like "strange" and "doesn't look good." What, specifically, makes the textures so bad they're not even possible to use?

T3RR0R15T: I never scaled down the Quake textures. Those are the original sizes. I remade most of the textures from scratch when the game went standalone. wwall1_1 is pretty much just a grid of lines and some noise because it was quick to make. The original had more detail and character, so I made the hr4 version closer to that. The images aren't really different "resolutions". They just have a different number of pixels. Resolution doesn't change unless the texture is scaled in game. They both have the same scale. The second one just repeats less often. If it's possible to make good looking textures that are smaller and have more repeats, it saves memory.

jitspoe · « **Reply #29 on:** March 18, 2011, 11:24:56 AM »

http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/pbcup_renoir_hr4_wip.jpg

DT wondered if his maps would look good with the new textures. Starting to look pretty decent, I think.

webhead · « **Reply #30 on:** March 18, 2011, 01:37:14 PM »

Quote from: jitspoe on March 18, 2011, 11:24:56 AM

http://digitalpaint.org/images/devel/pbcup_renoir_hr4_wip.jpg

DT wondered if his maps would look good with the new textures. Starting to look pretty decent, I think.

cool!!

MyeRs · « **Reply #31 on:** March 18, 2011, 02:02:38 PM »

ooooo I don't remember seeing Rock5_2.jpg posted in #paintball or here, just saw it got changed from that screenshot. It looks very nice in every map I've seen it in.

For people checking this texture it's on -- Wobluda/zpar11_beta/Pbcup_renoir/Shazam22 ---> that's all I have noticed it on right now.

EDIT: My only complaint about this texture, rock5_2.jpg , is that I think it could use a little brown/redish like the previous hr4 version you had of it.

CheMiCal · « **Reply #32 on:** March 19, 2011, 04:15:51 AM »

ugly.................. the only thing that looks nice is the water.

jitspoe · « **Reply #33 on:** March 19, 2011, 09:18:52 PM »

Quote from: CheMiCal on March 19, 2011, 04:15:51 AM

ugly.................. the only thing that looks nice is the water.

You're going to have to provide a little more feedback than that if you want to see improvements. What, specifically, is ugly, and what needs to be done to improve it?

joonas · « **Reply #34 on:** March 19, 2011, 09:47:41 PM »

The bricks on renoir seem a bit too gritty for me. I'd like to see a cleaner/brighter version, I think. I can't really form my opinion into solid words yet, but what I can say is that the texture you got now didn't manage to look high res at spots with low lightning and at higher angles. I'm only going by that picture though.

Another way to explain it would be that the texture doesn't feel happy to me O.o

Edit: The gritty/not happy thing is just an opinion/preference of mine and has nothing to do with what's actually better.

pvtjimmy · « **Reply #35 on:** March 27, 2011, 05:46:06 AM »

[18:10:51] <PvtJimmy> <jitspoe> http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/wgrnd1_6.jpg
[18:10:59] <PvtJimmy> this texture looks like i'm walking in a candy production hall
[18:11:29] <PvtJimmy> the "mud" should definitely be smaller to make it look better in game

jitspoe · « **Reply #36 on:** March 27, 2011, 12:48:44 PM »

Quote from: pvtjimmy on March 27, 2011, 05:46:06 AM

[18:10:51] <PvtJimmy> <jitspoe> http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/wgrnd1_6.jpg
[18:10:59] <PvtJimmy> this texture looks like i'm walking in a candy production hall
[18:11:29] <PvtJimmy> the "mud" should definitely be smaller to make it look better in game

First off, that's the low-res version. This is the high-res: http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/wgrnd1_6.jpg

Second, it's supposed to be rocks, not mud.

I'm not sure what you mean by a candy production hall. I can't say I've ever been in one.

pvtjimmy · « **Reply #37 on:** March 27, 2011, 01:00:44 PM »

To me, it looks rather fancy than realistic. Now that you say it's supposed to be rocks, I can indeed see it, but still it looks "too much" for me.

(screenshot from pbcup_renoir)

In case you do not want to make the rocks smaller, consider decreasing the amount of rocks in the textures.

-edit-

(screenshot from pbcup_renoir)

The above screenshot is with my old texture pack activated (Vipers pack). To me this is more what I'm looking for in a standard ground/grass texture.

T3RR0R15T · « **Reply #38 on:** March 27, 2011, 02:54:15 PM »

The mapper used the low res texture with stones, not the one without stones. So thats not jitspoe's fault.

jitspoe · « **Reply #39 on:** March 27, 2011, 11:37:54 PM »

I can certainly make the rocks smaller. I was just trying to match the original texture.

http://dplogin.com/files/textures/pball/hr4/city6_8.jpg - I did some work on that one to try to make it look a little more 3D and blend in better with other textures (the lichen stood out a bit too much).

Edit: Doesn't tile well - trying to find a better variation.