BMP or JPG?!

[Badfrank]

Over a long Time i have put many Objects placed on my Terrain.

In the Typeslist are nearly then 800 Entrys. As there are some Objects with big texture files I reworked them from BMP to JPG file format.

 

This safes about 1GB of Space. But now the Framerates are lower than before. Why this?

[+KnightWolf45]

i think its got to do whit decompressing the JPG but im not sure

[Centurion-1]

You shouldn't use JPG textures, we have been over this in other threads but basically it is more taxing for the GPU to decompress and render JPEGs than BMPs. A good middle way is DDS which is a compressed format BUT is made for easy handling and rendering by GPUs. Or just convert your BMPs to 256 colour palette, it also saves size.

[RogerSmith]

You shouldn't use JPG textures, we have been over this in other threads but basically it is more taxing for the GPU to decompress and render JPEGs than BMPs.

 

It's the other way around

[SFP1Ace]

It's the other way around

 

Are you sure mate? Why would JPEG compression put less strain on the GPU than uncompressed BMPs?

Edited September 21, 2012 by SFP1Ace

[RogerSmith]

Are you sure mate? Why would JPEG compression put less strain on the GPU than uncompressed BMPs?

 

You can use BMP, but if you are doing high resolution skins, JPG is so much more space and RAM efficient.

 

BMP are lossless, JPG is lossy. JPG is smaller because it has less quality, not because it's compressed.

[SFP1Ace]

You can use BMP, but if you are doing high resolution skins, JPG is so much more space and RAM efficient.

 

BMP are lossless, JPG is lossy. JPG is smaller because it has less quality, not because it's compressed.

 

Right, but I used to think (& I still do, unless proven wrong) that JPG textures, unlike .DDS ones, still decompress into the Video RAM to the full BMP size, so the only efficiency is less space on HDD, not in the VRAM?

[+russouk2004]

paintshop pro 7 which I use with photoshop,lets u convert bmps to uncompressed jpeg format which is good this jpeg uncompressed 679kb,,bmp equivalent is 3.65mb. speaks for itself the space saving etc

[Spinners]

I'm not seeing any frame rate hit using .jpg textures since I've been converting skins to .jpg. Third Wire skins are mainly .jpg but I appreciate this is mainly to do with file size and download speed.

[MigBuster]

Havnt seen much difference in using JPG or DDS

 

impressive skin work on that P-47!

[+ravenclaw_007]

if you edit a jepg skin it is no problem , but if you edit a dds skin everytime you save it you lose some more detail on the skin (always better you work with the Template if you have it )

 

we had this problem on the Buccaneer , now i use only jpeg and bmp

[Wrench]

I HATE working with DDS skins - some of the KAW birds use them, and the templates (psd) are so frakking HUGE!!! they choke both PS 6 and 7!!

 

if HD space in not an issue, maybe bmp. I've been doing a lot of WW2 stuff to jpg, but honestly ... I'm not really happy with. They 'look' the same in game but I've always got this nagging feeling in the back of mind.

 

Yah, that Jug skin is AWESOME!!

[Badfrank]

Is it maybe more a question of the Size in Pixel of the Skinfile than the Format (and Filesize)?!