z929669

... and stability is a long way off for highly modded setups until certain creative fixes are implemented. Neo's big patch is a good way to fix problems with some mods, but the inherent engine flaws need solutions like Altimor's I am personally waiting for several more months or even a year before finalizing my mods and playing the game.

agree

What? Your career? Your life? EDIT: OK, I get it... you are afraid of 30. 30s are THE BEST.Assistant prof must mean that you have tenure, no? Location: Nebraska, US Nationality: 60% German/Austro-Hungarian, 25% Irish, 7.5% Dutch and 7.5% Danish Occupation: Survey Research - Healthcare (previously, post-doctoral researcher, plant virology) Age: 44

Is that a fact? Why not only the portion mapped to the mesh? Can't the GPU throw away the unneeded info in the same way the cookie maker discards the remaining dough? He is not. He simply chose to use 2k textures this time ... it is easy to reduce textures, but one must paint new ones to increase (or do some fancy stuff to enlarge textures ... but this is not really increasing the resolution at all). He probably is just doing things the fast way until he is happy with the result ... then maybe he will do it up proper (or not, it does not really matter much IMO for LOD. 2k or even 1k is fine as long as there is the illusion of detail ... remember, you will never see a LOD up close).

Current Catalyst profiles allow association of custom settings with the executable (including the one OpenGL setting), but I always thought that these profiles altered config "under the hood" ... things that are not directly configurable by the user (e.g., CrossfireX behavior). I have yet to install 13.11 beta drivers over my current 13.8 beta drivers ... skipping 13.9 official release.

Wow, I think I like your new textures even more, same meshes, just different artwork? I will hold off on messing with these until you are finished with the revision :P In the meantime, I want to show everyone why LOD textures can't really be thought of as we thing about regular textures in terms of size (since regular textures use most of the 'canvas', but LOD textures use only a fraction of the 'canvas' ... although plants are unique in that most of them do not use the entire texture) i.e., 1k, 2k, 4k, 8k is actually a significant overestimate of the rendered texture pixels of plants and other 'branchy' things (for standard textures and LOD), and this is 4x so for the Regular SFO LOD: Basic LOD texture use: Regular LOD texture use (note that the new trees cannot fit on the full square canvas without raising the canvas one mip level [i.e., 1k to 2k or 2k to 4k, etc]) ... or reducing the original painted area:

I don't think there is really a *problem* with the SGD ersion, as it is not monochromatic black. I will see about adding some more detail though.

Got it, thanks ;)

Could you send me that? Which version did you pull it from? All versions on the Nexus have the broken version, so it is not my fault :D

Yes, I forgot to mention weathers. All my testing is under clear weather at about 9 am. I have yet to actually play with these mods :P ... and your LOD do match the trees very nicely ;)

OK, I am convinced now that my noise idea is viable as far as reducing contrast between the tree LOD and the background terrain (or sky or water ... that is part of the problem). The principle is the same as camouflage: break up the edges of an object to hide it. Thinning the alpha also works nicely to break up the edges, but I have gone just a bit too far I think. I'll create a revision that is a happy medium (although aspens need much more thinning than conifers ... they are doubly 'thinned' from the others in these shots). Mind you all, this is purely vanilla lighting in all of its crispness and with Revamped Exterior Fog for distance clarity. Vanilla outdoor lighting accentuates the LOD contrast quite a bit, so this is about as good as it gets from what I have played with. Also note that all LOD are based on the exact same vanilla LOD. Vurt's is a tweaked version of Rennn's I think (which is also tweaked vanilla) --> (see EDIT below) and mine is purely a fresh revamp of vanilla as seen in my last post ... same exact asset. First set (left) = vanilla Second set (middle) = Basic 186 Third set (right) = Basic 181b + my recolored version of Vurt's snowy pines and my custom vanilla LOD I'll update that last shot with my modification to the mask as indicated above. UPDATED Give the images a chance to sync with my DropBox before the thumbs become EDIT: also updated Vurt's LOD to his new Basic update for v1.86 (looks quite good with that version, but I still think the snowy LOD does not match the pines and that both could be a bit brighter). However, these updated Basic LOD are based on Vurt's own assets (rather than vanilla/Rennn) so now I have the Vurt source for Basic ... so I will try my hand at editing those like I did the vanilla. LOD will not only match in color on my and like systems, but it will also match in shape detail ;) EDIT: Sorry all. These are PNG, so they will slow down this page in the thread a bit. Will change to JPG when I get a chance. @Vurt You are using ENB in your previous post screens, right? Also, I have to say that I prefer your "less dead-ish" pines ... unless you are able to create this effect only on the lower branches. I am guessing that this may be possible. Usually (but not always), the dying/dryer branches are the older ones closer to the conifer base. This is certainly the prevailing pattern anyway (I used to teach plant evolutionary biology, and have a lot of experience with conifers as the ancestors of flowering plants )

Hmmm. I don't see the new uploads on your site. These look good, but I can't see the transition at all since it does not seem like there are any non-LOD trees in these shots (which could be a fantastic achievement if there actually ARE non-LOD trees here). I spent last evening creating a whole now approach to the LOD alpha mask using noise in the alpha channel and by thinning the mask a bit (mostly for the aspens): left is Vanilla, right is my modification.

@Neovalen et al Just thought that I'd point you all to the Pack page I mocked up analogous to Neo's current WIP, LE. It is incomplete, but it illustrates the flexibility of the Pack-creation engine at this point. Many more features to be included, but we have a viable start for those interested in participating to provide feedback for making this better. Go to the Form:Pack on the wiki to play around with creating Packs of your own (instructions here).

Just posting some back-&-forth I had with tehherb over PM. Thought it might be more useful out here: you need to log onto the wiki.cool, thanks. everything seems to be working and I've been playing around with page but i've moved it to rename it twice and have since realised I've left redirects. Just so you're aware if you want to remove them (i think you should) Immersive Survival is the current name, previously Immersive Hunter Surivival and originally Realistic Survival.You should be able to delete redirect pages by clicking on the redirect link on the final page and using Page Tools > Delete after you get to the redirect page.I've realised that what's causing the issue is that if you edit the mod list like you would on wikipedia any text i put there is global. Is there any way to make this private because with some basic table structure it looks quite good I feel. I tried to sort of keep the same style as the main STEP guide to make it more easily understood after installing STEP. Please do not play with any of the templates on the wiki. Many are hooked into Semantic Mediawiki, so if you are not familiar with this coding, then leave it to us (or better yet, learn how to code SMW, we could use the help! ... Google Semantic Mediawiki.). We also define styles using CSS classes, and we are not at all concerned with look at this time... only functionality. If you use the built-in mod table tools and allow the structure to work as intended, it should do just fine. We can improve the interface once we get the needed feedback. Valiant effort out there, but you are circumventing the purpose and all of the mechanics. Please save all of your relevant text and I will remove the current table so that it can be rebuilt using the intended mechanics. We can work on the styling later ... this is in alpha remember ;) I'll check back after you have finished copying all of the relevant content you need (i.e. notes in the table and the mod list and order). TIA You mentioned css classes, is it possible to use the classes you've set up on pack pages? if so would it be possible to see them? Yeah, I noticed just now after figuring out how to add mods that I didn't utilise any of the set up really and did an unecessary amount of copy-pasting table code lol. I have a bit of feedback if you're interested. how to add mods wasn't really clear, to me at least. it says add modlist on the page itself (after creating a modlist in the Pack Form settings) which made me think it was going to give me the same options rather than giving me options for text before and after as well as the add mod button. I'm not sure if there's another way to do this but the only way i can get to the settings is loading the page through the form for creating pack pages. am I missing something or is this the only way intended to reach these settings. perhaps adding a third column to the mod template or even better a user defined amount could be very useful? it makes it a lot easier to visually link certain bits of info to certain mods. just a thought. I know it's all in alpha but the menus and options are just a little clunky and less than user friendly. i'd also like to just thank you guys for step in general, I've used it for a while now and love how easy and straightforward (albeit time consuming) you make it to mod skyrim to hell. made an account specifically to mess with the pack thing as it felt like a good way to try and give something back :) keep up the good work. We will make it pretty once we have the mechanics working correctly. To create a Pack: Navigate to Form:PackEnter in a logical name for the pack and click [Create or Edit] (please do not include the work "Pack" or "STEP" in the name)The Pack Form is presented - Please carefully read the instructions on the form!Save the Pack when finished editing (edit the Pack at any time by repeating these steps)All Packs are added to Category:Packs once createdIf at least one Mod Table was created using the Pack Form, then the resulting Pack page will have a button --> [Add Modlist] or [Edit Modlist] ... for each table placeholder. These buttons call up another form for adding mods and mod notes to the list. This form allows for addition of text before and after each table. Wiki markup and template calls are allowed. It is a little clunky, but the functionality is there to allow construction of simple Packs to much more complex mod guides like STEP:Core or Skyrim Revisited.

... tell me about it .... Looks like 1.86 makes non-snowy pines browner and more dead-ish looking. And Vurt is playing around with the LOD as well ;)

Not sure what this means, but it all looks fine to me. Once you have your Pack ready for play or testing, be sure to create a [ Pack ] thread

For shadow and distant detail pop-in resolution, set your Skyrim Options for ultra distance settings (I don't recall the INI settings specifically right now).

I personally advocate Relighting Skyrim still, and impatiently await even one 'complete' overhaul to lighting.

If you use Recolored Basic for 181b (works fine for all Basic versions), you will overwrite the LOD as well as two snowy pines diffuse maps. I made those two diffuse maps a bit whiter and reduced the yellow tint a bit to blend better with the LOD and to look a bit 'snowier' overall. So if you overwrite Hi-Res Pines with Recolored, you will lose Hi-Res snowy pines and go back to the standard res for those. I would advise against Hi-Res Pines unless you are not installing many other mods, as this is quite taxing and largely defeats the purpose of using Basic. Alternatively, you could delete the snowy pines from Recolored, and you will get hi res versions, but they will be yellow-ish against the snowy-pine LOD (ENB will likely exacerbate). I can create the hi-res recolored as well though. Just not at the moment ;) I know that high-res pines are taxing on my system but I love them and have always used them. They just add immersion for me. What if I overwrite the recolored pines/lods with high-res pines? Not sure. I have never looked at Hi-res Pines against any LOD.When you say that I lose the hi-res snowy pines, do you mean that I lose them in only the LoDs? Or on every tree?I just looked at Hi-Res Pines (4k & 8k), and they deo not conflict at all with the Recolored textures. Hi-Res only affects the non-snowy pines, so your snowy pines are coming from Basic or Regular version. Recolored should be fully compatible if Hi_Res is based on same source as the current Regular and Basic versions.

If you use Recolored Basic for 181b (works fine for all Basic versions), you will overwrite the LOD as well as two snowy pines diffuse maps. I made those two diffuse maps a bit whiter and reduced the yellow tint a bit to blend better with the LOD and to look a bit 'snowier' overall. So if you overwrite Hi-Res Pines with Recolored, you will lose Hi-Res snowy pines and go back to the standard res for those. I would advise against Hi-Res Pines unless you are not installing many other mods, as this is quite taxing and largely defeats the purpose of using Basic. Alternatively, you could delete the snowy pines from Recolored, and you will get hi res versions, but they will be yellow-ish against the snowy-pine LOD (ENB will likely exacerbate). I can create the hi-res recolored as well though. Just not at the moment ;) I know that high-res pines are taxing on my system but I love them and have always used them. They just add immersion for me. What if I overwrite the recolored pines/lods with high-res pines? Not sure. I have never looked at Hi-res Pines against any LOD.

If you download the version linked in SR:LE, you will get a version that is all ready to go.

Actually, that mod appears to be 6 months in development.

You have access to edit Packs now ;) You can point to any mod viua any link outside of Nexus. Just create the mod page and add the custom external link using the form. Be sure to name the mod according to its official name (unless it is long or wordy, then use something shorter to keep nice URLs)