Hi there! You are currently browsing as a guest. Why not create an account? Then you get less ads, can thank creators, post feedback, keep a list of your favourites, and more!
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#1 Old 19th Oct 2009 at 12:09 AM Last edited by hisui_hana : 20th Oct 2009 at 2:26 PM. Reason: New Problem
Default Red Object New Issue
Okay...I thought I saw a thread similar to this a while back. The person's object turned blue I think. But after looking all day and not finding it, I made my own. WHAT did I do wrong? I think it has to do with the overlay .dds. If you know what thread I'm talking about please give me the link. Meanwhile, please help.
Screenshots
Advertisement
Forum Resident
#2 Old 19th Oct 2009 at 12:37 AM
You have mixed up the image files, you're using the alphamask image in place of the texture image. If you export them with their original names, you can import them more easily.
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#3 Old 19th Oct 2009 at 10:23 PM
Thank you Lemoncandy. I think I will try tonight and just start iver. I have my mesh object and Uv map so it won't be to much work. I let you know how it goes.
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#4 Old 20th Oct 2009 at 6:15 AM
Default Fixed old, but now new issue
Well. It is no longer red. YAAAAAAAY. But now the image is showing up pixelated. The original image is great quality. I made it myself and used a smaller version for the texture. It still has more than enough information. I saved it as a DXT3 (.dds) because I didn't want this to happen. Attached are the painting in game and the image I used. Any suggestion would be appreciated as I have had this problem before on other paintings I want to release.

Edit: The image I used is a PNG file. I saved a JPG version to use here.
Screenshots
Forum Resident
#5 Old 20th Oct 2009 at 4:58 PM
I don't know, but the game is quite crap at displaying textures when you're viewing from close up, and DDS is a compressed format so I expect some quality loss is inevitable.
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#6 Old 20th Oct 2009 at 9:33 PM
So how big does the picture need to be? I saved the uv map at 1024 x 1024. I thought that would help.
Forum Resident
#7 Old 20th Oct 2009 at 10:12 PM
Ah, that will be your problem then. Try saving to the exact same size the original had, less distortion that way.
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#8 Old 21st Oct 2009 at 3:23 PM
Do I need to remap or can I just change the size in photoshop without a problem?
Forum Resident
#9 Old 21st Oct 2009 at 8:02 PM
Yeh just resize, should be o.k.
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#10 Old 22nd Oct 2009 at 5:30 AM
Okay, I resized all my image .dds to 512x512 (original size). Then I recreated my texture and save at 512x512. Then I did not allow compression. The picture is still pixelated. There has got to be some way around this problem.
Screenshots
Field Researcher
#11 Old 24th Oct 2009 at 10:52 AM
Default How to make your objects less pixelated
To improve the texture quality of your objects, you need two programs:
Object Tool by Wes and s3pe . Be sure to install them correctly (read in the linked threads, they sometimes need other programs to work).

Make a new folder (There will be a lot of files. By making a new folder you don't mix them up with other files).
Start s3pe. Click File -> Open and open your package file.
Be sure that the box besides "Tags" on the bottom of the window is ticked.
Click on the line with the tag "MLOD" (If there is more than one MLOD, then choose the one with 0x00000000 in the Group column).
Click on Resource -> Export -> To file and save into your new folder (Don't change the name S3PE suggests!).
Start "S3 Object Mesh Tool". Click on "Decompile" and open the file you exported with s3pe.
The text "No Errors" should appear on the right (And a lot more files appear in your folder).
Click "MODL/MLOD Info" and open your exported file again (it ends with .lod). On the right appear a few info lines.
Look for the group with more vertices (here group 1).
Below that it says what blocks are responsible for the material of your object (here block 13 and block 14). (See picture 1)
Go into your folder. Look for the files that end with "...block13.mtlsrc" and "...block14.mtlsrc" and open them with a text editor.

There should be two lines that start with "MaskWidth" and two lines that start with "MaskHeight". The last value in this lines is something like 00000100 or 00000080. (See picture 2)
Change it to a higher value, for example 00000200 in each of this lines (don't take too high values, it doesn't improve the texture quality any further and slows your computer down).
You should have changed 4 values in the block13 file and 4 values in the block14 file. Save both files.

Go the the "S3 Object Mesh Tool" again. Click on "Recompile" and open the file that ends with .mcgf in your folder.There should appear "No Errors". You can close the "S3 Object Mesh Tool".
Go to S3PE again. Click on Resource -> Import -> from file and open the file that ends with .lod in your folder.
A small window appears. Don't change anything, just click OK.
Click File -> Save. You can close s3pe.

Test your object in game. Now the quality of the texture should be better . (Of course it can't be better than the quality of the .dds image you included).

I hope this will help. I tried to write it so that everyone can understand it.
This also works for objects that use patterns, not only for paintings.
Screenshots
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#12 Old 24th Oct 2009 at 11:18 PM
Killc*a, I think I've just become a groupie. Hallelujah my image quality has improved greatly! It may actually make it through moderation. *stops typing to dance, run the length of the house, and do a few backflips*. I have another painting that has the same problem and I will try the same technique there. Thank you so much.
Screenshots
Alchemist
#13 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 1:37 AM
Quote: Originally posted by Killc*a
There should be two lines that start with "MaskWidth" and two lines that start with "MaskHeight". The last value in this lines is something like 00000100 or 00000080. (See picture 2)
Change it to a higher value, for example 00000200 in each of this lines (don't take too high values, it doesn't improve the texture quality any further and slows your computer down).


00000080 is 128
00000100 is 256
00000200 is 512
00000400 is 1024

These are probably the most common values you would want to use, and you probably do not want to use one larger than the texture map size you are using.

If you like to say what you think, be sure you know which to do first.
Alchemist
#14 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 1:42 AM
Are you saying that larger size is not better here? This would not surprise me as things always come with an optimal size fit but I'm wondering how the Sims 3 code sees it. What happens if you plug in a size that is too large?

OM
In the Arena
retired moderator
#15 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 2:47 AM
Just the very info I needed, Wes! thanks...
I was gonna ask what values are accepted by the game and how it co-relates to the the texture size.

Also, the number of pairs of MaskWidth-MaskHeight in the .mtlsrc co-relates to the main texture dds(1st pair) and specular dds(2nd pair)?
Alchemist
#16 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 4:57 AM
I don't know for sure how it is coded, but my guess is that the mask sets a "step" size using texture/mask, meaning that a texture map of 512 and a mask of 128 would give a 4, which would mean only every 4th pixel in the texture map would be assembled into the rendered image.

That would agree with what we see happen on screen, the loss of detail. It is likely that if the mask value exceeds the texture size, a step of 1 would be used (as if they were equal).

I think optimum would be setting these values equal to the texture map size.

If you like to say what you think, be sure you know which to do first.
Lab Assistant
Original Poster
#17 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 5:28 AM
Thank you Wes for the number correlations. I'll have to make sure to get those down. My origial file only had a value of 100, but the texture was 512. I am at a loss as to how EA was able to get anything to show decently.
Test Subject
#18 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 7:03 AM
I think all the informations in the 2 files we use for applying transparency for example are specific files for the bump mask and the other for the specular mask.
Alchemist
#19 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 9:52 AM
I apologize if this is a stupid question Wes but if a 512 map with a 128 mask means that only every 4th pixel is assembled into the final rendered image then wouldn't a 512 map with a 512 mask mean that every pixel is assembled into the final rendered image?...and wouldn't that be better?

OM
Field Researcher
#20 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 10:53 AM
Quote: Originally posted by orangemittens
Are you saying that larger size is not better here? This would not surprise me as things always come with an optimal size fit but I'm wondering how the Sims 3 code sees it. What happens if you plug in a size that is too large?

OM


My computer needed really long for applying a pattern, when I set the numbers to 00001000 . And there is no further improvement in texture quality.

And thanks, Wes, for that detailed info.
Alchemist
#21 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 11:55 AM
Never mind question Wes...I used the numbers you listed and my painting sharpened right up...candy for you

Thanks for answer Killc*a.

It's kind of strange but when I first looked at my painting after changing the numbers per the list Wes posted it was still blurry. I changed its frame color and as usual it sharpened up but this time the sharpening "stuck" even back in Play mode.

OM
Field Researcher
#22 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 1:11 PM
Hooray ! Yet another problem that's been mastered !
You're all great !

… Sorry, I needed to get that out :P
Alchemist
#23 Old 25th Oct 2009 at 2:55 PM
Sometimes textures are "cached", but I am not sure what conditions cause cache refresh, very likely any CAST change.

When I am making changes to objects and testing them, after the initial run I usually delete all the cache files so that I do not have to worry about that spoiling my tests.

If you like to say what you think, be sure you know which to do first.
Alchemist
#24 Old 26th Oct 2009 at 2:11 AM
Some CAST changes seem to while others don't. At first I thought my painting was ruined somehow because if I put metal texture on the frame the image would be nice and sharp but if I turned the frame back to wood the image would get blurry again.

I went and cleared the caches as you said and the painting is now fine no matter which texture is applied to the frame.

OM
Lab Assistant
#25 Old 26th Oct 2009 at 11:51 PM
Ok, tried this and it makes me very happy. I'll be updating with hi-res versions of my fruitcrate pix soon. Just wanted to say thanks!
Page 1 of 2
Back to top