Amazingteknique Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 sif it is a normal map, it should be put in the normal map list. Otherwise you are correct.I probably worded my post wrong, after I add the file name to the leave readable, I still see the error in the log. Its with the FASA stuff if that makes any difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 I've experienced the same problem you show with FASA (and also with a few Firespitter parts). It's like they're reflecting illumination in a rotated orientation somehow. That may have confused the issue more since I'm not sure of the right technical words to use but it's very obvious when you see it.Do you have a link to the FASA pack so I can download it and try it out on my machine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaFT7 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 I just applied 2.7 basic to my install and took it from 3.1GB to 1.6GB. Winning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hexaphobia Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 How much dose the 2-7 basic lower graphics quality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHaFT7 Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 i'm running it a tick under the max and i'm not really noticing anything. But then again I just added universe replacer with 8k textures and a HD skybox. I removed a few of the moons that I don't visit often, but it's running great. Have kethane, KAS, B9, KW, and Tal's Spherical tanks installed as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deltac Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Do you have a link to the FASA pack so I can download it and try it out on my machine?Yep.SpaceportForum posts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 How much dose the 2-7 basic lower graphics quality?Very little. Compresses textures, and shrinks normal maps a bit to save a lot of space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Rbray, could we get a description of the differences between basic and aggressive just for nerd sake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 Rbray, could we get a description of the differences between basic and aggressive just for nerd sake?The only difference is in the config profile. Basic shrinks normal maps a bit, compresses all textures, and generates mip-maps for everything specified. Aggressive re-sizes ALL textures by a factor of 2, does not generate mipmaps for normal textures, and still compresses everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 What effect on performance does generating and not generating mip mapping have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 What effect on performance does generating and not generating mip mapping have?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MipmapBasically, about 30% more memory is used, but the GPU will render (miniscully) faster and textures will look much better when at a distance. PNGs in KSP suffer from lack of mipmaps, which is why they tend to look crappy far away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Thanks for the information rbray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 Thanks for the information rbray NP. Are there any specific mods that are SUPER popular that I should add to the list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 A few mods that are pretty big would be KAS, Kosmos, Soviet, BTSM (Not a big deal for the list but definitely something to consider in the future), Interstellar, Alternis, Firespitter, Infernal Robotics (or Magic Industries), and Kethane for sure, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 Alright, I'm moving to a new config system where all the config files are relocated to GameData/BoulderCo/textureCompressorConfigs/ and each config will have to be named as the folder that is to be managed. This way, configurations can be passed around MUCH more easily for mods, and mod creators can create their own configs. I also fixed the issue mentioned with the readability for FASA parts. Seemed it was because KSP was loading it us unreadable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 5, 2014 Share Posted January 5, 2014 Sounds like a good plan man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 5, 2014 Author Share Posted January 5, 2014 Update to 2.8:Moved to new config mechanism.Added LLL and NovaPunch2 config files.Fixed minor *_NRM.tga file issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
likke_A_boss Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Hmmm… I am getting no texture compression with 2.8 on either version. I have one or the other Installed with all of my extra folders added on in the Texture Compressor.cfg, but when I run, nothing is happening, in the log or otherwise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 Hmmm… I am getting no texture compression with 2.8 on either version. I have one or the other Installed with all of my extra folders added on in the Texture Compressor.cfg, but when I run, nothing is happening, in the log or otherwiseI have no clue how. Delete the entire boulder folder and install the new one as well as the cloud plugin if you have it and restart ksp. Nothing has changed besides where the configs go and a tga file issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 Hmmm… I am getting no texture compression with 2.8 on either version. I have one or the other Installed with all of my extra folders added on in the Texture Compressor.cfg, but when I run, nothing is happening, in the log or otherwiseGo ahead and send me the ksp.log file Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
likke_A_boss Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Found IT, disregardEdit:But MOAR info! It seems all of your pre-entered mods don't work at all. Log: http://pastebin.com/D5Pw1fC9 Edited January 6, 2014 by likke_A_boss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) Found IT, disregardEdit:But MOAR info! It seems all of your pre-entered mods don't work at all. Log: http://pastebin.com/D5Pw1fC9Hmmm... One of two things seems to be happening:1) Another mod is trying to compress the textures already committed by my mod. This is what looks to be happening. 2) Another mod is committing the parts to memory, making them unreadable. This is possible, but unlikely as far as I am aware. There should be a print at the end of the log once you get to the main screen that will summarize the memory saved. If this value is very small (<100MB) or not present at all something is likely wrong with my mod. Otherwise, I would suspect that another mod is compressing the textures.EDIT:Are you sure you got rid of all previous versions? If there were more than one copy, this could happen. Edited January 6, 2014 by rbray89 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
team.leit Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 What should I do if the savings is 61MB not matter how many mods I have installed? I am using the 2.7 basic compressor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbray89 Posted January 6, 2014 Author Share Posted January 6, 2014 61MB is pretty small... what mods do you have installed? You can add configs to take care of your other installed mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulletrhli Posted January 6, 2014 Share Posted January 6, 2014 (edited) I am loosing on upwards of 300-500MB which is quite nice. I wish I could lose more but oh well! Freaking amazing as is. Edited January 6, 2014 by bulletrhli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts