WIP in WIP, post your level screenshots!

[dissonance]

Nah I didnt use any. Whats so special about the lighting anyhow?

It's so... smooth.

Just turned down the lightmapscale. Its a simple way of adding lots of interesting detail to an otherwise bland area.

Mmm... I'd always thought that degraded performance too much. I guess I'll fiddle around a bit.

Ooo, to make up for that, would you scale up the lightmaps in places that are not going to be lit? Would that help at all?

[insta]

Nah I didnt use any. Whats so special about the lighting anyhow?

It's so... smooth.

Just turned down the lightmapscale. Its a simple way of adding lots of interesting detail to an otherwise bland area.

Mmm... I'd always thought that degraded performance too much. I guess I'll fiddle around a bit.

Ooo, to make up for that, would you scale up the lightmaps in places that are not going to be lit? Would that help at all?

Lower lightmapscale will add time to vrad during compile, so only use it on the surfaces where you know you will get some really neato shadows.

Scaling up lightmapscale won't really do much, since the default of 16 is already pretty high.

[csharp]

Hardly wip, made so far ~10min

[insta]

Shouldn't that go in the model thread

[Grinwhrl]

very nice but yeah, should bein the model thread, hehe

[von*ferret]

the bump on that wood is ridiculously high. If you put it that high to get slats in the wood then you should've modeled the slats. As is you're causing it to have an ugly as f background. Shaders look nice though, model is basic so I dunno what you want me to comment on.

[dissonance]

Nah I didnt use any. Whats so special about the lighting anyhow?

It's so... smooth.

Just turned down the lightmapscale. Its a simple way of adding lots of interesting detail to an otherwise bland area.

Mmm... I'd always thought that degraded performance too much. I guess I'll fiddle around a bit.

Ooo, to make up for that, would you scale up the lightmaps in places that are not going to be lit? Would that help at all?

Lower lightmapscale will add time to vrad during compile, so only use it on the surfaces where you know you will get some really neato shadows.

Scaling up lightmapscale won't really do much, since the default of 16 is already pretty high.

It doesn't do anything to ingame renders? What about when other objects are actively casting shadows on it? I mean... realtime. In game.

[rockdude86]

Nah I didnt use any. Whats so special about the lighting anyhow?

It's so... smooth.

Just turned down the lightmapscale. Its a simple way of adding lots of interesting detail to an otherwise bland area.

Mmm... I'd always thought that degraded performance too much. I guess I'll fiddle around a bit.

Ooo, to make up for that, would you scale up the lightmaps in places that are not going to be lit? Would that help at all?

Lower lightmapscale will add time to vrad during compile, so only use it on the surfaces where you know you will get some really neato shadows.

Scaling up lightmapscale won't really do much, since the default of 16 is already pretty high.

isnt it about lightmaps being low that gives you more quality :wink:

also good point dissonance, seems logical to me that something like that would affect performance. unless this goes by a totally different book of rules. blah i dunno anyway pure sex alex...

[insta]

Nah I didnt use any. Whats so special about the lighting anyhow?

It's so... smooth.

Just turned down the lightmapscale. Its a simple way of adding lots of interesting detail to an otherwise bland area.

Mmm... I'd always thought that degraded performance too much. I guess I'll fiddle around a bit.

Ooo, to make up for that, would you scale up the lightmaps in places that are not going to be lit? Would that help at all?

Lower lightmapscale will add time to vrad during compile, so only use it on the surfaces where you know you will get some really neato shadows.

Scaling up lightmapscale won't really do much, since the default of 16 is already pretty high.

isnt it about lightmaps being low that gives you more quality :wink:

Isn't that what I'm saying?

[Zacker]

See my last post for how it affects performance:)

[Tequila]

You should increase the lightmap scale for some areas though, and definitely for water. Set it to something ridiculously high, like 8192, as although the look of the water isn't affected by the scale, it shaves (for me at least) minutes off RAD.

[ReNo]

So the water doesn't use lightmaps at all then? Seems odd that if that is the case the compiler bothers to calculate them for water surfaces

I've seen too much confusion over the whole increase/decrease lightmap scale thing because some people are referring to the resolution and others refer to the scale. When people say make a higher resolution lightmap they mean you decrease the lightmap scale, and vice versa.

[rockdude86]

that was my point exactly with wat insta said, just fucking around :wink: (dutch humor )

seems those kind of things get people confused. english is confusing sometimes...

(edit) that water/lightmap thing is pretty weird indeed... maybe something to ask valve? i bet its just a stupid bug they didnt bother to remove because of them jumping on their schedules n shit

[BlueCoatKarma]

It's not just a VRAD problem, it affects performance in-game.

Look at the wireframe screenshots part way down in this thread:

http://forum.interlopers.net/viewtopic.php?p=75780&highlight=lightmap#75780

[rockdude86]

i really dont know about this but could you make a screen with the example you mentioned but then with the water?? cause i really doubt its the same thing. but if so shame on valve...