Texel Density
interpolator
I read some tutorials and olders post about that, but there is something that i can't understand.
I have 2 models that are about the same size and i want both of them to fit in 1k texture, however since they have some different pieces the unwrap will not be the same, and the only way that i could make them have the same texel was by making one of them smaller, and end up wasting some texture space.
So that is how it works? is worth to change to ''weird custom sizes'' to save the wasted amout of texture?
I have 2 models that are about the same size and i want both of them to fit in 1k texture, however since they have some different pieces the unwrap will not be the same, and the only way that i could make them have the same texel was by making one of them smaller, and end up wasting some texture space.
So that is how it works? is worth to change to ''weird custom sizes'' to save the wasted amout of texture?
Replies
You can pack both weapons on one sheet if they will always be rendered on the same map. If at times only one model will be loaded, you should keep them separate because then half that texture space would be unused.
I would need to see both UV sets, and both models with some sort of checker pattern at a medium-high repetition to give you more tips on how I'd do it.
''You can pack both weapons on one sheet if they will always be rendered on the same map. If at times only one model will be loaded, you should keep them separate because then half that texture space would be unused''
Dindn't know about that one too.
I look at texel density as a good set of guidelines usually, don't worry too much about being 100% correct at all times. the differences in size and density in your example are not worth giving yourself a headache over.
Decent consistency is definitely good and big inconsistencies will be obvious but those are much higher percentages than this. You are also kinda limited on the power of 2 resolutions as it was mentioned before, so please don't overthink this. Also, in the age of millions of indie games, with everyone playing everything (games are in motion), smaller inconsistencies won't be noticed by the most of people, not even by artists if it was a good game otherwise. You can choose between maximum detail and proper texel density basically.
Its also kinda annoying that people are becoming more and more lazy, and starting to read and give less effort than they used to. You don't even need to go to google, you could type into this little search bot up there on the right, and you would get a bunch of same topic threads. I haven't checked but there is possibly one on the first page ot the technical thread subsection. If not there, scrolling a few pages would flood you with them. I guess we will son stop replying to such threads. This isn't personally against you, it seems like a common approach nowadays.
Texel size actually is a tool too. A clever texel size prioritizing, even texel stretching could be very helpful especially in environment art, architecture , tiling surfaces etc .
You should only keep in mind that with soft like Substance Painter consistent texel size is quiet a requirement for procedural things ( rather a disadvantage of such soft ) but the textures could be re-baked then to whatever UV pack you want.
I hope so.
As someone who's been responsible for the quality of hundreds of sets of modular assets I put consistent and correct texel density pretty high on my list of priorities.
The "it's just a guideline" argument is valid if you're talking about a <5% variation but beyond that you're not only risking a mismatch in pixel size but visible inconsistencies in the scale of surface information and detailing - which looks shit. It'll also play havok with Shader effects like detail mapping, scrolling and so on.
It's true that rigid adherence to texel density can lead to wasted texture space but provided things are largely done properly it will tend to be pretty insignificant in terms of a whole game's worth of textures.
That said, if you're making one isolated piece for artstation then none of the above matters and you should do whatever makes it look best on the page
Understanding the texel density is an important thing indeed but turning it into some kind of a dogma beyond common sense is so wrong.
As a result we often see ugly repetitive walls with perfectly right texel density while stretching texel size In certain areas is all it could take to look good.
Like stated in the first line of my post, i did read a tutorial, about 3 older post and search for tutorials on youtube as i usually do before making a question, but couldn't find the answer of if it was normal to have texture space wasted and/or how much difference in texel density is acceptable. I could presume by what i read that some texture sometimes would end up being wasted, but thought that would be better to have more info about that befor commiting with something since i recently started to learn about.
@gnoob. ''Why people think that same texel size everywhere is such a of holy grail and undisputed dogma of 3d art?''
Do people think that? Like any other thing that i will commit my time into, i find best gather as much ''usefull'' information as possible to then start making tests and going back to those info when i forget something. since i started learn 3d i actually come across this very same thing in other topics. Where aparently i was getting way too (peaky,precisely,perfectionist?, can't find the word to use here), but i didn't know.
I would take the smallest of details and make them bigger, as screws and such can be hard to detail properly if the shells are small.