Improving terrain textures

Published September 23, 2005
Advertisement
So, i have improved by a lot the way the color table is generated.

It's similar to texture splatting; i have a set of layers (12 here), that each contain some conditions on the altitude and slope, an interpolation power, and a color. In the color table, for each texel i get the slope and altitude, and determine the layers affecting it. These layers are then blended together.

Don't forget that the generation of this color table is done once per planet, at construction time. So, i do not really care if there are 12 or 100 layers. In theory this allows me to make some planets with extremely varied terrain, although with "only" 12 layers, i think the results are starting to look good..

I can't decide which of the two textures is the best:





The first texture uses the layer which has the best weight, while the second one blends all the layers which have a weight > 0. The second one has smoother colors, but i'm not sure i really want this, as it'll make the textures less precise when appearing on the whole planet.

Opinions ?
Next Entry Farenheit
0 likes 12 comments

Comments

benryves
Very nice! I think the second one looks nicer, for what it's worth.
September 23, 2005 10:07 AM
dsecrieru
I also vote for the 2nd one :).
September 23, 2005 11:10 AM
Laz
Numbah Deux!
September 23, 2005 12:01 PM
Rixter
I like the second one too, the hard edges on the first make it look less realistic. But I also don't know how they would look in the game, with whatever lighting and effects you may have going on.
September 23, 2005 02:43 PM
Lost
I'm with Rixtor. I like the second one too, the hard edges on the first make it look less realistic.
September 23, 2005 05:11 PM
Ibaun
I vote for the second one.
First one does indeed have more detail, as you already mentioned yourself, but it makes me think of having a very nice 24 or 32 bit background and setting it to 256 colors.
September 24, 2005 11:20 AM
Ysaneya
From all the people i've been asking so far, not a single one prefered the first texture. So i guess the majority has spoken :) Thank you.
September 25, 2005 04:59 AM
dgreen02
numbar two!!11 :p
September 25, 2005 02:01 PM
Lutz
The second one looks really good.

How do you plan to do the detail texturing? If you plan to do 100 layers for the global terrain, it does not matter, I agree. But if you plan to do one genuine detail texture for each global layer, it makes things more complicates since you can't blend 100 textures. You could solve this by storing per patch the four/eight layers with the greatest weights, though...

Moreover, from my experience, the resolution of a global weight texture (i.e. a map that tells you "here is rock and there is sand") won't be high enough if you go to ground level - even if it's 1km per pixel. You could disturb the layer weights by noise, but the result won't look very good since for example the rock at steep slopes will "bleed" into the low-slope regions. Also, the detail texturing won't fit to the "Perlin-noisy" landscape.

September 26, 2005 02:45 AM
You must log in to join the conversation.
Don't have a GameDev.net account? Sign up!
Profile
Author
Advertisement
Advertisement