SF2 Screenshot Thread

[+EricJ 4,244]

I have to say that this is perhaps my preferable F-4 version, but I think after a few HUD tweaks it'll be alright.

 

And a little bit of iron for testing

Edited December 9, 2011 by EricJ

[+Dave 2,322]

The ARnie is by far the best version. I love flying the hell out of it.

[+EricJ 4,244]

Very true, so far the best maneuverable F-4 I've seen...

[+Sundowner 4,818]

Job done....

 

[+Sundowner 4,818]

Weasels....

 

 

[squid 21]

I have to say that this is perhaps my preferable F-4 version, but I think after a few HUD tweaks it'll be alright.

 

 

waiting ! :)

Edited December 10, 2011 by squid

[+Dave 2,322]

I think I shall never see a plane as lovely as an F-4 (and F-8).

[+EricJ 4,244]

waiting ! :)

 

Two weeks

[Wrench 9,846]

another revamp, almost done! (interestering to note the use of jpg skin textures on F-4D_78)

Edited December 10, 2011 by Wrench

[+SidDogg 130]

another revamp, almost done! (interestering to note the use of jpg skin textures on F-4D_78)

 

REALLY?!

 

...It doesn't look so bad.

 

I might have to try that.....

 

 

 

 

 

SidDogg

[+GrinchWSLG 24]

interestering to note the use of jpg skin textures on F-4D_78

 

JPG? Why?

[+Brain32 265]

JPG? Why?

 

Actually all TW models can now use JPG skins, I discovered that by accident.

This is quite good since LOD's are locked now and we can't hack them for using DDS thus if you are a compact mod maniac like me you can use JPG's

[DarthRevan 3]

I think I shall never see a plane as lovely as an F-4 (and F-8).

 

There is one as lovely as the Phantom II. The F-14 Tomcat :)

[+GrinchWSLG 24]

Actually all TW models can now use JPG skins, I discovered that by accident.

This is quite good since LOD's are locked now and we can't hack them for using DDS thus if you are a compact mod maniac like me you can use JPG's

 

As was pointed out elsewhere, JPG's are a bad idea. There's a reason they are never used for texturing.

 

Short answer: No.

 

However, if we load the same 1024 texture as a JPG or PNG file, it gets decompressed into 8-bit RGB, or 1024kb per channel, which ends up at the same 3mb size as were it a BMP. So JPG and PNG are actually more expensive despite having a smaller filesize on your harddrive.

 

So don't do it.

 

I'll point out that even though the JPG gets decompressed to the same size as a BMP in the end, the fact is you have to waste resources decompressing it. Not to mention JPG compression ruins a lot of detail a BMP would otherwise not. If you're really that hard up for file size shrinking that you want to make these sacrifices I guess you can, but to me its not worth it.

 

Edited December 10, 2011 by GrinchWSLG

[+Brain32 265]

As was pointed out elsewhere, JPG's are a bad idea. There's a reason they are never used for texturing.

 

I'll point out that even though the JPG gets decompressed to the same size as a BMP in the end, the fact is you have to waste resources decompressing it. Not to mention JPG compression ruins a lot of detail a BMP would otherwise not. If you're really that hard up for file size shrinking that you want to make these sacrifices I guess you can, but to me its not worth it.

 

 

To each his own I guess, this skin:

 

 

...is made of five 2048x2048 textures, I didn't loose any details as you can convert to JPG at various quality levels(I convert at highest possible quality), performance loss is not measureable so I don't care for that either, the only difference I got from this is the fact that in *.bmp the skin takes 61,5 MB's and when I converted it to JPG it takes only 6,5 MB's so go figure it's a 90% reduction.

 

Sure for people with really really really old computers it might be an issue, mine is built in 2008 so not the latest and greatest either but there is apsolutely no performance issue with it, I see no reason whatsoever to keep gigabytes of skins on my hard drive just to keep it in BMP for no gain whatsoever...but hey like I said to each his own.

[+Julhelm 266]

Those textures still take 61.5mb of actual video memory... Besides that looks incredibly blurry for 5 x 2048^2 textures looking at the panellines since I can easily have individual rivets and small stencils using just a single 2048 dds texture:

[CavtankerKyle 1]

Domestic Escort...and I love ANG skins!

 

 

Edited December 10, 2011 by CavtankerKyle

[+Brain32 265]

Those textures still take 61.5mb of actual video memory...

Yes, same as BMP's....

 

Besides that looks incredibly blurry for 5 x 2048^2 textures looking at the panellines

Bad showcasing on my part, Phanstoms eurocamo is not really a skin you would showcase burtal panel line details is it, does not lool better in BMP either...however this one is a bit better:

 

 

...since I can easily have individual rivets and small stencils using just a single 2048 dds texture:

 

DDS is exactly what I use for all 3rd party mods, because I have LOD access on them, however we don't have access to TK's LOD's so we can not use DDS textures on them, with that in mind I see no reason whatsoever to use BMP. DDS in this case is out of the picture entirely...

[GodsLt 3]

I have to say that this is perhaps my preferable F-4 version, but I think after a few HUD tweaks it'll be alright.

 

And a little bit of iron for testing

 

Can I chime in?! what phantom is that?? Where can I get it?? LOL

By the way, AWESOME screenies guys! Keep'em coming!

 

 

 

[+EricJ 4,244]

AB tailcode WIP

[stuntman 170]

Those textures still take 61.5mb of actual video memory... Besides that looks incredibly blurry for 5 x 2048^2 textures looking at the panellines since I can easily have individual rivets and small stencils using just a single 2048 dds texture:

 

Wow! Where can we find this beauty???

[+EricJ 4,244]

More work

[squid 21]

* US NAVY LAVI / EF200 / J-10 / Grippen image *

 

the f*** is this? lol

Edited December 10, 2011 by squid

[Wrench 9,846]

well, on the Hooligans skin, that's the stock 3W skin maps, with resued decals from a 2007 1stGen skin.

 

whats REALLY Odd with the Lod, is I have 2 other skins in the F-4D_78 folder that are bmps ... and they ALL work just fine. TK's done something sneaky with the new locked lods ... they're reading and using BOTH formats. How that's possible, I have no idea!!

[+EricJ 4,244]

Heading out