voodoo47 on 8/2/2014 at 13:41
I'm fully aware that the original textures for bark and stone are identical, but when making a hires version, the bark textures should look like bark, not like stones flipped 90 degrees - you can only get away with this when the textures are lowres. the textures can look similar, in fact this would be preferable - but the bark texture definitely should look woody, not stony.
Inline Image:
http://matthew.mumford.com/photos/australia/4606_tree_bark_close_up.jpgC-BEAM on 8/2/2014 at 18:29
voodoo47: of course, sorry, my mind was somewhere else...
Wille on 8/2/2014 at 23:18
Quote Posted by C-BEAM
core\tanbrck + core2\tanbrck
I hate to be nitpicky but can you make the bricks a bit smoother? They don't appear to be so cracked in the original texture.
LarryG on 9/2/2014 at 00:59
I was going to say that both core\tst2 tf2 and core\tanbrck + core2\tanbrck look more painted than real. Asside from the cracks, it may be that the black mortar between the joints makes it look like the stones are floating and not set in anything or touching each other.
Zoro on 9/2/2014 at 03:31
Wow, love the wallpaper and bark textures! It looks really fancy :D
nicked on 9/2/2014 at 09:02
It's not black though, there's clear brown patterning - I read those textures as being mortarless brick anyway, so like these: (
http://cgtextures.com/textures.php?t=browse&q=1944) http://cgtextures.com/textures.php?t=browse&q=1944. I reckon they're all good.
LarryG on 9/2/2014 at 11:46
If you look at the mortarless examples you posted the link to, they are not all black between the stones. The stones are seen to actually touch in shadow. That's very different than these here. The ones you linked to, being real stones, actually look like real stones. These don't.
core\bstnwal1 tf2 looks great. But the two others don't.
Edit: on closer look, there are a few places in core\bstnwal1 tf2 where the black is overdone too.
