SKYRIMLE Bigger and Boulder - Mountain and Wet Rock Customization (by SparrowPrince)

[TechAngel85]

:)

 

I actually just finished comparing the conflicting meshes in NifSkope and I have to tip my hat to Hein84! He worked hard on his mod. Most use the NS/SMIM meshes as they are the same (at least in polygon count and structure); however, where they didn't work for Hein84 he went nuts on the meshes and improved them a great deal to fit his mod. I count 6 meshes from SMIM that were improved upon and of those the polygon count quadrupled in most cases!

 

Poly Count

SMIM | RS

 

269 | 1307

233 | 1159

172 | 765

348 | 1323

384 | 1641

1539 | 4511

 

EDIT:

You're right, Z. When comparing Vanilla vs Vanilla Fix, Vanilla is much better.

[Guest]

I love these back and forths, they are amazing! :D

 

The polygon count is higher on the RS mesh making it a higher detailed mesh.

I hear game developers everywhere screaming. ;) I love Brumbek and Hein, but the rocks being smoothed just isn't what I would call improved. I bet a lot of future games will just use tesslelation up close, but for now I made this:

 

 

The rock I made there took about 10 seconds and has about the same poly count as some of the smaller vanilla rocks. After one smooth there are definite diminishing returns. I think Bethesda did a good job on the meshes, but the person(s) who did the UVs did a really poor job. To my knowledge, all no strecthing does is scale the UVs and doesn't technically improve them (I did this with my wet rocks). That would require re-uving them. I don't think SMIM does this either, but I could be wrong. No sure about RS either because I haven't had a look, but are the UVs re-done/moved tech?

[Hein84]

hey Sparrowprince ;)

 

Yes, I had do redo/rescale many UV-maps, they weren't neat enough to allow parallax, without a strong ENB correction the textures tended to flip around. I did it also to increase details on some of the smaller rocks

 

BTW.

I'm not sure what your talking about, I haven't increased the poly-count, only the UV-mapping.

Those higher poly-meshes probably are the Smim meshes I adapted.

The only mesh-related program I use so far is Nifskope

 

Would never ever smooth down rocks by automatics ;)

[Hein84]

hey techangel85 and z929669!

 

hope we are consent about the mesh-origin now ;)

 

No problem at all z929669, it's nice to see how careful and accurate your community treads the uptake of new mods :)

[TechAngel85]

I love these back and forths, they are amazing! :D

 

The polygon count is higher on the RS mesh making it a higher detailed mesh.

I hear game developers everywhere screaming. ;) I love Brumbek and Hein, but the rocks being smoothed just isn't what I would call improved. I bet a lot of future games will just use tesslelation up close, but for now I made this:

 

 

The rock I made there took about 10 seconds and has about the same poly count as some of the smaller vanilla rocks. After one smooth there are definite diminishing returns. I think Bethesda did a good job on the meshes, but the person(s) who did the UVs did a really poor job. To my knowledge, all no strecthing does is scale the UVs and doesn't technically improve them (I did this with my wet rocks). That would require re-uving them. I don't think SMIM does this either, but I could be wrong. No sure about RS either because I haven't had a look, but are the UVs re-done/moved tech?

 

SMIM edits the UV maps as well on some of the things he fixes.

hey Sparrowprince ;)

 

Yes, I had do redo/rescale many UV-maps, they weren't neat enough to allow parallax, without a strong ENB correction the textures tended to flip around. I did it also to increase details on some of the smaller rocks

 

BTW.

I'm not sure what your talking about, I haven't increased the poly-count, only the UV-mapping.

Those higher poly-meshes probably are the Smim meshes I adapted.

The only mesh-related program I use so far is Nifskope

 

Would never ever smooth down rocks by automatics ;)

 

My only conclusion is that you must have grabbed them from the full/high resolution options. I use the half-sized textures/meshes due to my 1GB VRAM. I hadn't even thought of that possibility. Thanks for clearing that up though! I think we're all on the same page now about your mod. We're going to have to take a look at each mod with and without the No Stretching mod and SMIM to make sure the texture mapping isn't being messed up by these mods and it's being mapped as the authors intended.

[Hein84]

Yes, for "All in One" package I use the high detailed Smim meshes, they work just fine on my old dual core rig.

I may provide lower poly-meshes too, not sure if needed.

Are you experiencing performance loss using high-poly Smim outdoors?

[TechAngel85]

Yes, for "All in One" package I use the high detailed Smim meshes, they work just fine on my old dual core rig.

I may provide lower poly-meshes too, not sure if needed.

Are you experiencing performance loss using high-poly Smim outdoors?

To be honest, I've never tested the high-poly version of SMIM. I'll put that on my list of things to do.

[z929669]

I love these back and forths, they are amazing! :D

 

 

The polygon count is higher on the RS mesh making it a higher detailed mesh.

I hear game developers everywhere screaming. ;) I love Brumbek and Hein, but the rocks being smoothed just isn't what I would call improved. I bet a lot of future games will just use tesslelation up close, but for now I made this:

 

 

The rock I made there took about 10 seconds and has about the same poly count as some of the smaller vanilla rocks. After one smooth there are definite diminishing returns. I think Bethesda did a good job on the meshes, but the person(s) who did the UVs did a really poor job. To my knowledge, all no strecthing does is scale the UVs and doesn't technically improve them (I did this with my wet rocks). That would require re-uving them. I don't think SMIM does this either, but I could be wrong. No sure about RS either because I haven't had a look, but are the UVs re-done/moved tech?

This is the affirmation I was seeking. I did not fully understand the "UV" mapping until I read the wiki article. Now I see that "UV" has noting at all to do with light ... and is simply "XY" that would otherwise be redundant with the 3D coordinates. Thinking about this as a problem of fitting a 2D object onto a 3D model, it becomes clearer to me what causes 'wrinkly' or 'pinched' rocks in some cases:

 

The coordinate mapping of the 2D texture onto the 3D object in No Stretching may be 'fixing' the stretched parts of the texture (like at the equator in the following spheres), but in doing so, the textures are getting condensed or 'squished' at parts of models analogous to the poles of the spheres. In the case of the image below, I believe that the texture coordinates are not scaled to the polygon count of the model (the checkers span polygons in both cases, but the second sphere shrinks the checkers at the poles and stretches the ones at the equator, while the first tiles the checkers). In No Stretching, I believe that the X-Y coordinates of the flat image are scaled to the polygon count of the image ... this could explain why many of the No Stretching textures look 'squished' (a good analog might be to cinch down a 5 cm diameter circle of skin on the back of your hand into 3 cm ... or just push your skin together and watch the wrinkles come). I agree that the higher poly count may not always be necessary, since it tends to smooth things (otherwise, it is just a waste of info) but that the real culprit may be the UV mapping of No Stretching ... that mod goes too far in the other direction: Vanilla spanned to many polygons per unit of texture, and NS spans too few in many cases (or simply scaled everything linearly rather than proportionately to the 3D space).

 

 

 

This may be better demonstrated in the following image:

 

 

Read about mapping a globe in a 2D image for even more 'aha' moments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map_projection

 

 

Therefore, I am thinking that we should either NOT use No Stretching, or we should only use that mod for convex and flat objects ... concave objects with a lot of 'pinching' like mountains will just get too 'squished'. My guess is that Brumbek has accounted for this. By now, he may already have covered the UV maps of rocks that really had an issue before, and NS may just be redundant and overkill.

 

I will test this evening and post a compare of the various mountain mesh combinations in relation to AOF textures and then redo (again!) the mountain retex compares against the ideal mesh complement. This may change the results quite a bit, eh?

[TechAngel85]

Just some information for everyone...

 

I've done some performance compares with SMIM

 

Vanilla (SMIM half-sized)  >>  Vanilla (SMIM Full-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM half-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM full-sized)

 

The performance change isn't noticeable on my system. I also noticed on this run that Terrain Bump makes RS&M look just plain awful! So those conflicting files would need to be removed from TB if RS&M is chosen.

 

One issue popped up during this test and here is a video I put together that shows some "texture slipping" with RS&M:

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzRdPeGYc1g

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

[rootsrat]

Sorry if this is not a valid question, as I wasn't following the forums closely for past couple of days. Did we consider Vivid Landscapes series for compares?

 

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 4

[TechAngel85]

Sorry if this is not a valid question, as I wasn't following the forums closely for past couple of days. Did we consider Vivid Landscapes series for compares?

 

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 4

That's want RS&M is. Vivid Landscapes - Rocking Stones and Mountains Parallax.

[Hein84]

Just some information for everyone...

 

I've done some performance compares with SMIM

 

Vanilla (SMIM half-sized)  >>  Vanilla (SMIM Full-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM half-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM full-sized)

 

The performance change isn't noticeable on my system. I also noticed on this run that Terrain Bump makes RS&M look just plain awful! So those conflicting files would need to be removed from TB if RS&M is chosen.

 

One issue popped up during this test and here is a video I put together that shows some "texture slipping" with RS&M:

 

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzRdPeGYc1g

 

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

Oh damn!

Have you applied the Non-ENB-patch?

Hoped I sorted out all moving formations, it seems I've overseen one...

Could you please add a pic of your map location so I can reedit it and add it to the patch? :)

[z929669]

Just some information for everyone...

 

I've done some performance compares with SMIM

 

Vanilla (SMIM half-sized)  >>  Vanilla (SMIM Full-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM half-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM full-sized)

 

The performance change isn't noticeable on my system. I also noticed on this run that Terrain Bump makes RS&M look just plain awful! So those conflicting files would need to be removed from TB if RS&M is chosen.

 

One issue popped up during this test and here is a video I put together that shows some "texture slipping" with RS&M:

 

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzRdPeGYc1g

 

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

 

WOW ... Ewis looks like a fantastic alternative. I will add this to the compare as well.

 

Also, SMIM half-sized and ultra-sized variants are only textures, not meshes... and they have very little impact in my experience.

[TechAngel85]

Snip...

 

One issue popped up during this test and here is a video I put together that shows some "texture slipping" with RS&M:

 

 

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzRdPeGYc1g

 

 

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

 

Oh damn!

Have you applied the Non-ENB-patch?

Hoped I sorted out all moving formations, it seems I've overseen one...

Could you please add a pic of your map location so I can reedit it and add it to the patch? :)

I have not, I'll do that real quick.... Done. That fixed it! Sorry for the heart attack! Haha!

Just some information for everyone...

 

I've done some performance compares with SMIM

 

Vanilla (SMIM half-sized)  >>  Vanilla (SMIM Full-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM half-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM full-sized)

 

The performance change isn't noticeable on my system. I also noticed on this run that Terrain Bump makes RS&M look just plain awful! So those conflicting files would need to be removed from TB if RS&M is chosen.

 

Snip...

 

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

 

WOW ... Ewis looks like a fantastic alternative. I will add this to the compare as well.

 

Also, SMIM half-sized and ultra-sized variants are only textures, not meshes... and they have very little impact in my experience.

I first started using Ewis because I was so sick of the vanilla grey paint and have really grown to love it. Here a quick compare video that someone did for more interest:

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QErcyQ_0pA

[Hein84]

 

Snip...

 

One issue popped up during this test and here is a video I put together that shows some "texture slipping" with RS&M:

 

 

 

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzRdPeGYc1g

 

 

 

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

Oh damn!

Have you applied the Non-ENB-patch?

Hoped I sorted out all moving formations, it seems I've overseen one...

Could you please add a pic of your map location so I can reedit it and add it to the patch? :)

I have not, I'll do that real quick.... Done. That fixed it! Sorry for the heart attack! Haha!

Just some information for everyone...

 

I've done some performance compares with SMIM

 

Vanilla (SMIM half-sized)  >>  Vanilla (SMIM Full-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM half-sized)  >>  RS&M (SMIM full-sized)

 

The performance change isn't noticeable on my system. I also noticed on this run that Terrain Bump makes RS&M look just plain awful! So those conflicting files would need to be removed from TB if RS&M is chosen.

 

Snip...

 

The video isn't that high quality because it was just a quick toss together.

 

 

The second texture in the video is one that I've been using on my personal profile: https://skyrim.nexusmods.com/mods/27926/

WOW ... Ewis looks like a fantastic alternative. I will add this to the compare as well.

 

Also, SMIM half-sized and ultra-sized variants are only textures, not meshes... and they have very little impact in my experience.

I first started using Ewis because I was so sick of the vanilla grey paint and have really grown to love it. Here a quick compare video that someone did for more interest:

 

 

[video=youtube]https-~~-//www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QErcyQ_0pA

 

 

Yes, Ewi's textures do look really nice indeed:)

They also work with my parallax maps cause they use nearly the same high/depth values.

The "Meshes only" package i provide on RS&M page is a nice way to let them work together, Ewi seems to share my opinion about that, we are in contact;)