[BUG-20171] It's time for higher resolution textures (2048x2048) #2854
Comments
Whirly Fizzle commented at 2016-07-14T00:05:03Z Please don't even go there until BUG-9898, BUG-2514 etc are fixed. |
Chaser Zaks commented at 2016-07-14T06:54:42Z, updated at 2016-07-14T06:55:10Z I don't trust (a majority, not all but a majority) content creators with this level of responsibility. All I can see is 8 faced jewelry with 8 unique 2048x2048 textures. There is already an abundance of polygons, this would just make it worse. |
Mel Vanbeeck commented at 2016-07-14T08:56:24Z Yes, I agree that a certain level of optimism is needed for this type of advancement, but as 4k monitors become the norm in the coming years, 1024 textures will eventually just be completely inadequate. The jump will need to happen some time. The parallel between the effectiveness of the mesh upload "test" isn't really useful. Obviously it's not going to stop people from doing illegal things just by telling them it is illegal. Chances are they already knew that stealing was stealing. Texture uploads would be similar only to the extent that people that don't care won't change their behavior, however, this is one area where many people just don't understand the issue of textures, limited video memory and SL's performance. With a little info on the basics of texture budgeting, you'd at least have some gains to counter the losses of foolish or ignorant designers. There could be other incentives post-authorization-test to use smaller textures, as well, such as changing the upload fee based on texture size. If a 1024x1024 was increased to 20L, and 2048x2048 to 40L, people may think a little deeper about uploading a dozen massive images when a smaller 10L image would suffice. |
Lucia Nightfire commented at 2016-07-14T09:35:48Z, updated at 2016-07-14T09:39:02Z It's utterly ridiculous at the moment that any resolution should cost L$10 to upload. In a time when LL is crunching down on Avatar Complexity, they need to next reform the texture upload costs with more evaluation, such as texture format, presence of an alpha channel, resolution ratio and of course, resolution size. Then you might see costs like: opaque 1x1 - 256x256: L$10 Texture uploads to the asset server need to be treated as investments, not recreational like they are with my.secondlife.com A cost range for textures will hopefully force creators to use better judgement with their implementation and revitalize the beta grid's purpose for experimentation and testing. |
Ansariel Hiller commented at 2016-07-14T12:01:52Z 2048x2048px textures with 4 channels use 16MB of memory per each texture. Given the fact that the LL viewer can effectively use 368MB for textures (that's what you get if you choose 512MB in the graphics preferences!), you can exactly show 23 of those high-res textures in a scene. Now figure JohnDoe JewelryMaker that slams that on his bling bling stuff... |
Kyle Linden commented at 2016-07-20T19:02:11Z Hi Mel, Thank you for your suggestion. The team has reviewed your request and determined that it is not something we can tackle at this time. Please be assured that we truly appreciate the time you invested in creating this feature request, and have given it thoughtful consideration among our review team. This wiki outlines some of the reasoning we use to determine which requests we can, or can't, take on: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Feature_Requests Thanks again for your interest in improving Second Life. |
How would you like the feature to work?
Uploader should allow 2048x2048 texture resolution — possibly only enabled per account after a mesh and content theft style "test" which provides some basic information on texture budgets and video memory.
Why is this feature important to you? How would it benefit the community?
In the 13 years since SL has been around, two major changes have created a substantial need for higher resolution textures. First is the typical display resolution of SL residents. I don't have any stats from SL users, but for general trends http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_display.asp provides some insight into what sort of display resolutions are common.
of those who visited that site:
10 years ago, 83% had a resolution of 1024x768 or lower
today, 49% have a resolution of 1920x1080 or higher, with the majority being in the "higher" category
Second, with the introduction of mesh and 64m objects, certain features like large floors or exterior walls with baked lighting have created a need for very large textures to keep a reasonable ratio between texture pixels and screen pixels at normal viewing distances. Using up 4 texture faces to build a 2048x2048 out of four 1024x1024 textures is possible but eats up half of the usable faces for a mesh.
Certainly this could open the door to even more of a problem with video memory bloated with too much texture data, but with a little information before the door opens, many creators would pick up some information which would help them make smarter decisions about how they use textures in their work, potentially improving the overall texture budgeting of the grid's designs, rather than worsening it.
Links
Duplicates
Related
Original Jira Fields
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: