nohq vs. no ? (normalmaps)

[icewindo 29]

Hi,

Has anybody insight on why we all are using NOHQ maps but not NO maps? I created 2048x textures for both and the no map is way smaller (2.07 MB) than the nohq (4.85 MB) but I didn't spot any quality differences in the texture itself. I also used NO maps on some large normalmaps for a2 in the past but nobody seemed to complain (other than silently enjoying the smaller file sizes).

Didn't spot differences in the reflections on the model either.

Opening up the nohq or no I noticed that no is saved as DXT1 and nohq as DXT5. Apparently DXT1 loses alpha channel information, but that should not be important on solid textures.

http://www.grandprixgames.org/read.php?4,452531,452769

The BIKI doesn't seem to have info on that.

[max power 21]

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/HQ_Normal_Maps

[icewindo 29]

http://community.bistudio.com/wiki/HQ_Normal_Maps

Ah thanks Max, didn't spot that in the BIKI , so there actually is a noticeable difference.

[max power 21]

It looks like one is less compressed than the other.

[icewindo 29]

It looks like one is less compressed than the other.

Yeah in the BIKI example I see the clear difference, for my texture it's not so easy though imo:

http://s7.directupload.net/images/130427/rimxkfgc.png

As I have ~8 2048 textures, this would be a pretty handy save in file size (-20MB).

[max power 21]

Well you definitely lose almost all of the subtle detail in the map but it's so fine I don't know if it would really read in game. Also depending on the size of your map, it's possible that someone without a superhuman videocard would not see the first mipmap of your textures anyway.

[raymix 1]

Hi, guys,

First of all super sorry to ressurect very old thread, but instead of making new one, I'd simply like to add my findings.

This topic is not discussed much, especially when it comes to terrains, but here's a screenshot of comparison between both normal map methods.

_no vs _nohq:

http://i.imgur.com/dsBFg6q.jpg

I've deliberately bumped snow out of terrain shape in world machine and smoothed it out in grome in hopes that normal maps will take care of smoothness in distance and add them details back. It does the job "ok", for some reason normals are bit too bright for my liking, but not eager to edit like 400 rvmats to change that. Plus the whole limit with cell sizes..

terrain is 4096 x 2.5

To be honest you can't see much difference instantly, but check out the hill above players head, there's some extra bumpiness added.

It could be just me, but imo _nohq looks much better than _no on terrains. I've noticed Altis using _no, so I got worried if terrains are limited to low quality normals only.

Hope this somehow helps anyone who gets here trough search engines.