Question about importing bitmaps
by James Rozee · in Torque Game Builder · 03/19/2007 (7:24 am) · 6 replies
When I import some of my artwork into TGB, I notice a marked drop in quality of the image. Am I doing something wrong? I don't mind it for some images but I want others to be exactly as they are in the artwork I create. Here is a comparison between what is in TGB and what is in my graphic file:
I'm importing PNGs. I uncheck all of the checkboxes but allow unloading. I remove Smooth and use Full for my other settings. Is that not correct? Or am I missing something simple? Thanks.
James
I'm importing PNGs. I uncheck all of the checkboxes but allow unloading. I remove Smooth and use Full for my other settings. Is that not correct? Or am I missing something simple? Thanks.
James
About the author
#2
03/19/2007 (8:08 am)
Much better! Thank you. I knew it was something simple I was missing. :) For some reason I thought Filter Pad had something to do with transparencies. :( Thanks again.
#3
We have simple backgrounds (sky with some clouds) that was made by our artist for a 800x600 backdrop. He then saved the png with 512x512. When brought to TGB and stretched to the full 800x600, I couldn't notice much difference and to the common user its completely neglectable. Even if I use a full screen (1280x1024) the results are very acceptable.
If you know your way with graphic software, and looking at your examples I think you do, you can use this to shrink it to 64x64, 128x128 and so on and get nice looking graphics in a much lesser space. Most of the GFX we have right now are 32x32 or 64x64 with 3kb to 12kb, and that can make a difference when packing a game for the casual market.
I don't know if TGB uses base 2 (sp?) sizes better or not, but since we are glad with the results, we'll keep using it as a standard.
03/19/2007 (8:59 am)
You are welcome, glad I could be of assistance.We have simple backgrounds (sky with some clouds) that was made by our artist for a 800x600 backdrop. He then saved the png with 512x512. When brought to TGB and stretched to the full 800x600, I couldn't notice much difference and to the common user its completely neglectable. Even if I use a full screen (1280x1024) the results are very acceptable.
If you know your way with graphic software, and looking at your examples I think you do, you can use this to shrink it to 64x64, 128x128 and so on and get nice looking graphics in a much lesser space. Most of the GFX we have right now are 32x32 or 64x64 with 3kb to 12kb, and that can make a difference when packing a game for the casual market.
I don't know if TGB uses base 2 (sp?) sizes better or not, but since we are glad with the results, we'll keep using it as a standard.
#4
03/19/2007 (9:14 am)
Thanks! I'll have to give that a try. It could save me a lot of space or just give me space to do more. :) Thanks again. 
#5
03/19/2007 (3:36 pm)
If you want highest performance and the least possible problems, you are right, use power of 2 square pictures. (depending on the card, square is not needed but even if non square is supported, square is still more performant)
#6
03/20/2007 (6:55 am)
Something else I noticed is that my images have better quality if I import the smaller detailed items as separate images. I was importing a mockup with portraits of characters as part of it. The portraits come out much clearer, if I import the portraits individually and the background as a separate item.
Ricardo Vladimiro
Default Studio Name
Try checking the Filter Pad check box. As far as I know, TGB uses some sort of filtering and the results I have are quite good, even with stretched or compressed png files.
Hope it helps.