GUIDE [WIP] DDSopt & Texture Overhauls

[z929669]

Discussion thread:
DDSopt Guide by STEP
Wiki Link

---

 

GET DDSopt:
Github Pre-release versions
Official Nexus versions (select pre-release update 4)

[z929669]

One problem is that the compression options are grayed out on the Constraints tab if Apply > Compress all known image formats (PNG, BMP, etc.) is UNticked.

 

IMO, this option should be configurable since Apply > Re-compress and re-mip all textures (DDS) IS ticked.

 

 

 

This behavior makes me think that DDSopt will NOT re-compress my DDS files (contrary to the Apply menu settings) unless I force compression of ALL image formats. So during my run to process the vanilla textures that I will be using in my own game, I am running with both Apply menu options ticked, but after, I will need to eliminate all of the converted PNG --> DDS files under textures/interface/books/ and copy over the vanilla PNG files.

 

I'd rather they be copied over without conversion at all in the first place, whilst being assured that all of my DDS textures have been considered for processing by DDSopt.

 

Hope that makes sense.

[z929669]

DDSopt Pre III RUN III:Loose files:

 

Pre5b Suggested Settings

 

Skyrim - Textures + cleaned&corrected ( HighResTexturePack01 + HighResTexturePack02 ) --> Skyrim - Textures (opt) + Dkyrim - HR_Textures (opt)

 

(this is my personal vanilla game pack) Settings:

 

 

Run Time approx 00:33:00 (no errors) --> 187.2 Mb texture reduction after cleaning redundancies.

[log attached]

Vanilla.7z

[z929669]

.... and finally. this is a compare of what I believe to be the aspen (I have not verified though Confirmed NOT the aspen!). Regardless, I think that it is clear that the new PreIII is adding foliage, and I think it is ovearall improving quality of all textures:

 

First is vanilla followed by DDSopt PreIII:

 

[frihyland]

That first picture looks quite a bit more full than the second, you sure you didn't reverse them?

[z929669]

Nope, did not reverse The first is NOT more full in the least, sorry to say. Look carefully at both the tree in the foreground as well as in the background & quickly flip back and forth between the two. Also note the other plants and rocks, especially in the distance. The image on the right has more detail, and more foliage

 

The proof would be to compare in Compressonator.

---

Left is vanilla, right is DDSoptPre3 and right is diff (SOME diff is due to juxtaposition of some tree branches, but that only applies to the tree in the foreground [and the water to some degree maybe] but NOT trees & rocks in the background.)

 

[Note that I produced these using ultra settings in SKR Options] [Also note the frame-rate diff between Vanilla and DDSopt-ed using ultra settings!]

[ivactheseeker]

I agree with z929669, the first looks more full than the second except for a very few spots.

Also, the fps gain is huge

 

 

EDIT: ops, i meant the second looks more full than the first :D

[frihyland]

Sadly this method of comparison is completely useless to me, it takes me 5 seconds of loading then 2 seconds of white and then the next image loads.

 

I'll get a tutorial of how to properly do comparison images (for the poor bastards with a crappy internet and/or computer) up on the testing guide first thing. :P

[z929669]

All you need to do is save the images to your HDD and use Windows image viewer to click back and forth

 

The latter are PNG + BMP, so they take longer to load... but not if you save them locally ;)

[z929669]

I agree with z929669, the first looks more full than the second except for a very few spots.

 

Also, the fps gain is huge

 

 

I believe you mean that the image at right looks fuller than the image at left in the previous posts, no?

[ivactheseeker]

I believe you mean that the image at right looks fuller than the image at left in the previous posts, no?

Yes, you're right this time, i don't know what i was thinking

 

 

@ frihyland

 

 

I just opened the images in two different tabs, it worked for me :)

[blacksol]

yep second looks more fuller and, imho, better

[frihyland]

I just opened the images in two different tabs, it worked for me :)

 

That works great, thanks will use that for now. I still want this beautiful site we have here to be used to the fullest though, but I am patient kinda

 

I see the difference clearly now, foreground (hanging leaves) still looks slightly better in 1st one in my opinion but the mipmaps (branches) are radically improved in the second.

 

Overall a pretty substantial improvement, the trees are definitely not Aspens though (those are the gorgeous trees outside of riften).

[z929669]

 

I just opened the images in two different tabs, it worked for me :)

 

That works great, thanks will use that for now. I still want this beautiful site we have here to be used to the fullest though, but I am patient kinda

I see the difference clearly now, foreground (hanging leaves) still looks slightly better in 1st one in my opinion but the mipmaps (branches) are radically improved in the second.

 

Overall a pretty substantial improvement, the trees are definitely not Aspens though (those are the gorgeous trees outside of riften).

 

 

I should have mentioned the tabs option... just a bit trickier flipping between with the mouse is all. Win Photo Viewer is nice for that kind of thing. Just use the arrow keys.

 

 

 

I was thinking that the aspens might be near Riften, but did not know the code to COC there and check (I did not think that those gnarly things looked like aspens , but who knows what Beth might have named them). I'll do some compares for that next (probably later this evening).

[blacksol]

If using firefox then use ctrl+pg up or ctrl+pg dn to change tabs - No mouse needed :) To my knowledge no equivalent in IE and I have not used chrome.

[z929669]

If using firefox then use ctrl+pg up or ctrl+pg dn to change tabs - No mouse needed :) To my knowledge no equivalent in IE and I have not used chrome.

 

 

Yep, same in Chrome... good to know, thanks ;)