Jump to content

[1.8-1.11] TextureReplacer 4.4 (4.4.2020)


Recommended Posts

i pulled the old hard drive out of storage to get the original psd file for Oinker's Skybox. i'm doing a conversion to dds. i thought i'd ask if there are any changes you want (those of you who use it). it's still going to be a dark, realistic skybox to simulate what the naked eye sees when not adjusted to darkness (based off tycho starmap 16k x 8K tif). i'll also release it in a low-res pack for the ram-challenged.

funny note: "skybox" is what we called my brother's super-hot 6' 1" girlfriend. i sure miss her.

edit: i forgot... i made a custom EVAvisor and skybox-matched set of EnvMap textures for the reflections when the reflection plugin came out a year ago. it looks just like the apollo 11 moon walk pics and you can barely see the kerbal in there. kept it to myself; sorry about that.

Edited by Oinker
Link to post
Share on other sites
i pulled the old hard drive out of storage to get the original psd file for Oinker's Skybox. i'm doing a conversion to dds. i thought i'd ask if there are any changes you want (those of you who use it). it's still going to be a dark, realistic skybox to simulate what the naked eye sees when not adjusted to darkness (based off tycho starmap 16k x 8K tif). i'll also release it in a low-res pack for the ram-challenged.

funny note: "skybox" is what we called my brother's super-hot 6' 1" girlfriend. i sure miss her.

edit: i forgot... i made a custom EVAvisor and skybox-matched set of EnvMap textures for the reflections when the reflection plugin came out a year ago. it looks just like the apollo 11 moon walk pics and you can barely see the kerbal in there. kept it to myself; sorry about that.

Yours is the only one I use. It's in the priority list of things to do every time there is an update to the game...also I will never say the word 'skybox' again and keep a straight face :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Avera9eJoe

Just getting it from here should be enough, weirdly enough this version seems a bit different from the one I got, 116mb vs 111,6mb.

Some files are different, but its even more different than yours. The issues when not properly versioning releases.

One big difference you check on is the kerbin scaled file.

Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought i'd ask if there are any changes you want (those of you who use it).

Maybe a high-res pack for the not so ram-challenged? 8k x 4k pretty please? :-)

Oh, and in space the background ist much darker than viewed from an athmosphere. So maybe stars down to 6m5 visible as dark grey pixels are ok, IDK. Otherwise I love your skybox, it's the only one which allows me to actually use the stars for navigating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question for you Shaw (yes another one, sorry ;.;) regarding memory and lag. I know that TextureReplacer uses a good chunk of memory on load up if you have a lot of textures installed, but does TR slow down loading and FPS when in flight or after initial start up? I'd love to optimize my FPS as much as I can and I'm wondering what lag TextureReplacer adds (if any).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe a high-res pack for the not so ram-challenged? 8k x 4k pretty please? :-)
The dds cubemap standard is six images of equal height. The original 16k x 8k image, once split to six images, gives me something like 4150 x 4150 that I adjusted to an even power of two (4096) for the ati card owners. I can upscale the image to 64k x 32k prior to splitting, then reduce the six images to 8192. I don't have the hardware or available memory to test it so I'll just put them in the dropbox and await feedback as to whether the upscaled textures look better in-game. I don't include mipmaps in the dds's so there is no reduction in detail at distance (there shouldn't be for the skybox). Please do use mipmaps on parts and planets. The file sizes are larger because of their inclusion but you save processing power (at no discernible visual loss) when the engine switches to them.
Oh, and in space the background is much darker than viewed from an atmosphere. So maybe stars down to 6m5 visible as dark grey pixels are ok, IDK.
No point in arguing here. You want 'em darker, I'll release a darker set as well; no skin off my back.
[Your skybox] is the only one which allows me to actually use the stars for navigating.
I don't remember if I even got the north and south stars in the right hemispheres in the original....guess I did. I'll double-check that for sure. After I split the images, it's a puzzle-game, flipping, rotating, and renaming them to one another until I match the seams and have the stars in the correct hemisphere. I failed the puzzle-game last night and some of my sides were missing...too tired. I'll give it a go after I do some zombie-killin'. As for navigation aids, I've added two more notable objects (a galaxy and another supernova) and they're a little easier to spot than before. You should be able to steer by these objects alone (once you find them) without knowing our constellations.

dropbox link here: :( not yet, i'm afraid. i still have to work and kill zombies, you know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
@Avera9eJoe

Just getting it from here should be enough, weirdly enough this version seems a bit different from the one I got, 116mb vs 111,6mb.

Some files are different, but its even more different than yours. The issues when not properly versioning releases.

One big difference you check on is the kerbin scaled file.

I just did a complete redownload of my textures and those ones and they are all literally the exact same resolution and textures... :confused:

I did a re convert and upload of all of them anyways (as well as adding in Endraxial's more favorite Tylo texture and fixing the "surface shine" on liquid ocean planets-[was caused by Alpha-channel transparency which I removed]). :P Upload will be done in a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a question for you Shaw (yes another one, sorry ;.;) regarding memory and lag. I know that TextureReplacer uses a good chunk of memory on load up if you have a lot of textures installed, but does TR slow down loading and FPS when in flight or after initial start up? I'd love to optimize my FPS as much as I can and I'm wondering what lag TextureReplacer adds (if any).

Slowdown can be caused if you use some big textures or more texture variety (each Kerbal its own instead the same textures for all), then your graphics card must transfer more data between VRAM and GPU, which can be a bottleneck. The next thing are reflections: every second frame (depends on settings) the whole scene in one of six possible directions is rendered, which is also not easy on performance.

If we don't count slowdown caused by bigger/more textures and reflections TR's impact should not be measurable. The only code that executes on per-frame basis is TREvaModule, a part module added to all Kerbal EVAs and handles initial personalisation, visor reflections, "Toggle EVA Suit" button and -- in case you have IVA suit -- it checks every frame whether atmosphere is still suitable for the IVA suit. However, since you probably have like tens to hundreds parts at your scene at a given time and each part has several part modules (each Kerbal EVA has 11 part modules originally), this TREvaModule should be negligible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, there's been a bit of discussion (okay, more of a monologue on my part, not much more than thinking with my typing fingers) about the reflection system. I have yet to do any code diving, though I totally intend to do that later today, but... from the way it has been described to me, the level of reflectivity on a model that does not have specific objects defined for it's windows, as an example, or in the case where you want the specific object to be less reflective overall, is reliant on the transparency of the textures applied to those objects on the model. I was thinking that this could be more controllable if there was an optional parameter that could be set in which the reflection system ignores the main texture of the part and uses a separate mask image instead (a basic white texture with the non-transparent parts made completely transparent, just as it works with the main part texture right now. Completely optional of course, leaving the current functionality untouched if the parameter specifying another texture to use as the mask is not supplied. Any thoughts? As I said above, I fully intend on taking a look at the code and seeing how it might be possible in my own time, but I thought I'd run it by you in case this was already implemented and simply undocumented (not that I've read any documentation anywhere, I'm way too lazy at times for that.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
So, there's been a bit of discussion (okay, more of a monologue on my part, not much more than thinking with my typing fingers) about the reflection system. I have yet to do any code diving, though I totally intend to do that later today, but... from the way it has been described to me, the level of reflectivity on a model that does not have specific objects defined for it's windows, as an example, or in the case where you want the specific object to be less reflective overall, is reliant on the transparency of the textures applied to those objects on the model. I was thinking that this could be more controllable if there was an optional parameter that could be set in which the reflection system ignores the main texture of the part and uses a separate mask image instead (a basic white texture with the non-transparent parts made completely transparent, just as it works with the main part texture right now. Completely optional of course, leaving the current functionality untouched if the parameter specifying another texture to use as the mask is not supplied. Any thoughts? As I said above, I fully intend on taking a look at the code and seeing how it might be possible in my own time, but I thought I'd run it by you in case this was already implemented and simply undocumented (not that I've read any documentation anywhere, I'm way too lazy at times for that.)

One thing that should be noted, is that I'm fairly certain stock KSP planet textures support reflections in the same way as TR's reflections. I noted when converting Endraxial's planets that all the liquid-ocean bodies had the terrain completely invisible with Alpha-channel. I removed the transparency when I converted first and I noticed that all the liquid-ocean planets had very reflective terrain (stock KSP light source reflection, not mirror reflection). I didn't remove the Alpha-channel transparency in the most recent update and though I haven't checked, I'm betting the terrain reflections are gone now. Could be useful information to note.

Edited by Avera9eJoe
Link to post
Share on other sites
So, there's been a bit of discussion (okay, more of a monologue on my part, not much more than thinking with my typing fingers) about the reflection system. I have yet to do any code diving, though I totally intend to do that later today, but... from the way it has been described to me, the level of reflectivity on a model that does not have specific objects defined for it's windows, as an example, or in the case where you want the specific object to be less reflective overall, is reliant on the transparency of the textures applied to those objects on the model. I was thinking that this could be more controllable if there was an optional parameter that could be set in which the reflection system ignores the main texture of the part and uses a separate mask image instead (a basic white texture with the non-transparent parts made completely transparent, just as it works with the main part texture right now. Completely optional of course, leaving the current functionality untouched if the parameter specifying another texture to use as the mask is not supplied. Any thoughts? As I said above, I fully intend on taking a look at the code and seeing how it might be possible in my own time, but I thought I'd run it by you in case this was already implemented and simply undocumented (not that I've read any documentation anywhere, I'm way too lazy at times for that.)

Unfortunately, KSP doesn't use such texture masks (like most other engines do) but it abuses alpha channel for that purpose. It has several shaders each treating alpha differently: "[KSP/][bumped ]Diffuse" and "[KSP/]VertexLit" shaders ignore alpha, "[KSP/][bumped ]Specular" treat it as specular mask, "Transparent/Diffuse" and "Transparent/VertexLit" treat it as transparency etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Submitting an actual bug report might actually get you some attention instead of whining about it.

It's among known issues, I still haven't found out how to render atmosphere in KSP 1.0.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's among known issues, I still haven't found out how to render atmosphere in KSP 1.0.

i did update 1.0 tr and no black atmo and 1.0.2 i update tr i have black atmo

Edited by tkw
Link to post
Share on other sites
i did update 1.0 tr and no black atmo and 1.0.2 i update tr i have black atmo

No, that wasn't atmosphere but the initial colour of render buffer because skybox was not rendered. Haven't you noticed that blue "atmosphere" was also visible during night and in space?

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, that wasn't atmosphere but the initial colour of render buffer because skybox was not rendered. Haven't you noticed that blue "atmosphere" was also visible during night and in space?

you ganna fix it? :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does anyone have ANY packs with female heads yet? Because I'd (and I assume a lot of others) like some variation among my female kerbonauts.

I'd be pleased if someone just was able to extract the default female kerbal texture and post it up. I don't know how to get in to those resources with my Mac. Once the default texture is up as a template, further development of new textures can proceed apace.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd be pleased if someone just was able to extract the default female kerbal texture and post it up. I don't know how to get in to those resources with my Mac. Once the default texture is up as a template, further development of new textures can proceed apace.

I've been hoping Scart91 would gift us a layered PSD when the new pack is released. He was saying that it should take about a month to have the new texture pack ready so... that should be coming up shortly. Either way we'll have the female textures then.

Proot may or may not be working on something as well, but I think he's mostly working on EVE and Scatterer at the moment from his activity in the forums.

necKros was also working on some female heads for us as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't remember if I even got the north and south stars in the right hemispheres in the original....guess I did.

North and south is quite ok, east and west not so much: The chart is mirrored now (wasn't in 0.90). But I am not using your original files, I converted them from png to dds using Gimp. Maybe I messed up something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My custom skybox isn't showing up on my 1.0.2 game. It worked the first time I loaded the game, but now it always loads the stock skybox even though it should be using the new one.

Ditto for my EVA suits, though I think that's due to the changes made to the structure in 1.0.2. Is there a way to modify the Pimp My Kerbals suit pack to work in the current game?

Edited by Mitchz95
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...