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)

[toshaka]

Reason why i use Start8 from stardock.

Not using metro at all.

Metro on a desktop or laptop kinda sux. :@

 

Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Tapatalk

[z929669]

Reason why i use Start8 from stardock.

Not using metro at all.

Metro on a desktop or laptop kinda sux. :@

 

Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Tapatalk

Yes, I know, but that only covers up the problem. I think Metro is likely responsible for your current problem and perhaps more to come ...?

[toshaka]

I dont think do.

Metro doesnt block something like that.

That would be uac or an av.

But the key is made, just not the settings.

And with other people it does work on Win8.

Maybe i do something wrong somewhere.

Everyone once in a while over look things :s

 

- Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Tapatalk

[stoppingby4now]

Offcourse I did run skyrim already thru the launcher once so it has that key.

Else TES5Edit would still pout out a warning ;)

 

And I checked and it is there for sure.

Even the DDSopt key, just no settings in it besides alpha contrast and opacity.

 

Well it doesnt matter if I have full admin rights.

HKM is used for all users in this case.

 

I know how windows works tho, my works is ICT ;)

HKLM is a system registry location and is locked down, so you do need Administrator rights to write to it (any user that has UAC enabled won't be able to write to it if the program doesn't initiate an elevation of privileges). But, the fact that the DDSOpt key exists and the settings aren't being saved sounds like a bug perhaps. I'd bring it up to Ethatron.

[LogicalUser]

I was looking through the various screenshots on the performance comparison section of the wiki, and noticed something odd about the Riverwood screenshots

 

The STD & HRDLC Riverwood shots both feature large bushy & healthy looking treetops in the distance, center frame

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/3/3f/HRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

 

Every other Riverwood image (the optimized HRDLC images & those for mod texture packs, optimized & not) shows small, scraggly treetops in their place

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b3/OHRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b7/SKYHD_2k_-_Riverwood.jpg

 

Is there some sort of setting change or tree mod at work here that would explain this? Or is this somehow the result of the optimization process?

[stoppingby4now]

I was looking through the various screenshots on the performance comparison section of the wiki, and noticed something odd about the Riverwood screenshots

 

The STD & HRDLC Riverwood shots both feature large bushy & healthy looking treetops in the distance, center frame

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/3/3f/HRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

 

Every other Riverwood image (the optimized HRDLC images & those for mod texture packs, optimized & not) shows small, scraggly treetops in their place

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b3/OHRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b7/SKYHD_2k_-_Riverwood.jpg

 

Is there some sort of setting change or tree mod at work here that would explain this? Or is this somehow the result of the optimization process?

I had ran across the same thing awhile back, and it was determined there was a missing mip level after optimization. Looks like the same thing at play here.

[z929669]

I was looking through the various screenshots on the performance comparison section of the wiki, and noticed something odd about the Riverwood screenshots

 

The STD & HRDLC Riverwood shots both feature large bushy & healthy looking treetops in the distance, center frame

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/3/3f/HRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

 

Every other Riverwood image (the optimized HRDLC images & those for mod texture packs, optimized & not) shows small, scraggly treetops in their place

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b3/OHRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b7/SKYHD_2k_-_Riverwood.jpg

 

Is there some sort of setting change or tree mod at work here that would explain this? Or is this somehow the result of the optimization process?

I had ran across the same thing awhile back, and it was determined there was a missing mip level after optimization. Looks like the same thing at play here.

Those are my first DDSopt results, before Ethatron added the special foliage treatments, since these have an atypical alpha. Using the latest release with the settings on the wiki will give you better trees and foliage LODs ... improvement actually.

[LogicalUser]

Those are my first DDSopt results, before Ethatron added the special foliage treatments, since these have an atypical alpha. Using the latest release with the settings on the wiki will give you better trees and foliage LODs ... improvement actually.

 

And I'm guessing the optimized tree texture a standard texture, which would explain why it's there in all the subsequent screenshots with mods added on top

 

Great to hear there's been improvements, I'm still in the process of getting everything finished optimizing & assembled properly

 

I'm still somewhat limited in my understanding of this process, is there any downside to running this on content that might already be optimized, or content that doesn't appear to shrink in size? I saw DDSopt mention somewhere this is lossy compression, but your saying it's possible to improve using DDSopt, which sounds quite interesting

[stoppingby4now]

 

I was looking through the various screenshots on the performance comparison section of the wiki, and noticed something odd about the Riverwood screenshots

 

The STD & HRDLC Riverwood shots both feature large bushy & healthy looking treetops in the distance, center frame

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/3/3f/HRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

 

Every other Riverwood image (the optimized HRDLC images & those for mod texture packs, optimized & not) shows small, scraggly treetops in their place

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b3/OHRDLC-Riverwood.jpg

https://wiki.step-project.com/images/b/b7/SKYHD_2k_-_Riverwood.jpg

 

Is there some sort of setting change or tree mod at work here that would explain this? Or is this somehow the result of the optimization process?

I had ran across the same thing awhile back, and it was determined there was a missing mip level after optimization. Looks like the same thing at play here.

Those are my first DDSopt results, before Ethatron added the special foliage treatments, since these have an atypical alpha. Using the latest release with the settings on the wiki will give you better trees and foliage LODs ... improvement actually.

That's good to hear. Looks like we need to update those images.

[z929669]

Those are my first DDSopt results' date=' before Ethatron added the special foliage treatments' date=' since these have an atypical alpha. Using the latest release with the settings on the wiki will give you better trees and foliage LODs ... improvement actually.[/quote'']

And I'm guessing the optimized tree texture a standard texture, which would explain why it's there in all the subsequent screenshots with mods added on top

 

Great to hear there's been improvements, I'm still in the process of getting everything finished optimizing & assembled properly

 

I'm still somewhat limited in my understanding of this process, is there any downside to running this on content that might already be optimized, or content that doesn't appear to shrink in size? I saw DDSopt mention somewhere this is lossy compression, but your saying it's possible to improve using DDSopt, which sounds quite interesting

All compression is lossy, so DDSopt will not increase quality of the native texture. At most, it will reduce size without loss of quality of already improperly-compressed formats. However, the mip treatment actually improves many textures' mip-map levels so that distant detail is actually enhanced noticeably. Especially rocks and foliage.

[Kelmych]

I started a new game and happened to go into the Kynareth temple in Whiterun and looked at the shrine. It uses textures from Psychosteve's Golden God Shrines which are optimized by DDSopt. The textures are 1024x1024, and DDSopt changes almost all of them from DXT5 to DXT3. There isn't much if any information in the alpha channel of almost all the textures. The shrine didn't look quite right in the game (it looked like a lower resolution version of the shrine), so I compared the original vs optimized textures using the Preview mode viewer in DDSopt. Ideally the difference image would be black, but in this case there it showed noticeable differences, and the optimized textures(s) didn't look nearly as good as the original texture(s). The shrine in Kynareth, for example, had jagged lines in the primary channel texture where the original image had straight lines in that part of the primary channel texture.

[SSL]

"--Instructions for fixing the HRDLC before DDSopt-ing" this post linked from 1st post is no longer valid, is it?

[Cy4n1d3]

Out of curiosity: are the vanilla textures conflicting with the Unofficial High Resolution Patch deleted by using the updated batch files provided in the DDSopt-Guide?

If I'm not mistaken, esp files are loaded before the loose files, thus being overwritten if a loose version of a file exists? Wouldn't these 'fixed' files be overwritten by the loose files installed using NMM?

 

I'm asking because I'm doing the whole extract-optimize-repack-re-bsa stuff right now.

As it's not recommended to repackage the vanilla und high-res textures into bsa-files I'm just repacking the dlcs'.

 

 

Nevertheless, great work you guys are doing here, it's remarkable what kind of progress DDSopt has made und how supportive you are.

Thanks!

[Kelmych]

"--Instructions for fixing the HRDLC before DDSopt-ing" this post linked from 1st post is no longer valid' date=' is it?[/quote']

I'm not sure which post you are referencing. We changed the instructions when the UHRP was released, so the instructions prior to that are not consistent with what we now recommend.

[Kelmych]

Out of curiosity: are the vanilla textures conflicting with the Unofficial High Resolution Patch deleted by using the updated batch files provided in the DDSopt-Guide?

If I'm not mistaken, esp files are loaded before the loose files, thus being overwritten if a loose version of a file exists? Wouldn't these 'fixed' files be overwritten by the loose files installed using NMM?

 

I'm asking because I'm doing the whole extract-optimize-repack-re-bsa stuff right now.

As it's not recommended to repackage the vanilla und high-res textures into bsa-files I'm just repacking the dlcs'.

 

 

Nevertheless, great work you guys are doing here, it's remarkable what kind of progress DDSopt has made und how supportive you are.

Thanks!

I checked the textures replaced by the UHRP 1.1.0 and made sure that these textures were not deleted by the batch file, in case the UHRP was applied before the batch file. You will see annotations in the batch file that mention this; there are some deletions in the old version of the batch file that now have REM at the beginning of the line for this reason.