Quick question about lightmap scales. - Developers

I read that higher lightmap scales can slow down the rendering, I read in another thread that it was suggested to use lightmap scale 4. 1. If I am going to use lightmap scale 4, should I use it everywhere? 2. If 1 = yes, will it slow down the rendering as hell? 3. Is there a quick trick on changing the lightmap scales, or do I have to change it on every surface?

[QUOTE=Chili Banan;19626558]I read that higher lightmap scales can slow down the rendering, I read in another thread that it was suggested to use lightmap scale 4. 1. If I am going to use lightmap scale 4, should I use it everywhere? 2. If 1 = yes, will it slow down the rendering as hell? 3. Is there a quick trick on changing the lightmap scales, or do I have to change it on every surface?[/QUOTE] The lower then lightmap scale the more "refined" the lightmaps will be on that face. If you have a face with a rough/jaggy lightmap that looks bad with the default lightmap scale, lower it. 1. Fuck no, leave it at 16 unless it looks bad in-game. 2. If 1 had = yes. Yes it would, it probably wouldn't even compile this year. 3. Face edit tool. Hold ctrl, click on faces, lower lightmaps. There's no other way.

Okay, thanks.

Setting the lightmap scale to 1 is perfectly fine, if you have a computer that can compile it. For a full level, with major brush faces, count on about 6-10 hours of compiling time. I personally use 2 at the absolute smallest.

[QUOTE=SweetSwifter;19629474]Setting the lightmap scale to 1 is perfectly fine, if you have a computer that can compile it. For a full level, with major brush faces, count on about 6-10 hours of compiling time. I personally use 2 at the absolute smallest.[/QUOTE] I hope you aren't using 2 on everything...

[QUOTE=selby3962;19629789]I hope you aren't using 2 on everything...[/QUOTE] I use 2 in most cases, lighting in source is really cheap as it's not rendered realtime. And I don't have any problems compiling it, there is something called lightmap optimization.

[QUOTE=selby3962;19629789]I hope you aren't using 2 on everything...[/QUOTE] Provided that compile time and file size are no issue then I don't see any problem with having fairly large lightmap scales on every surface. Admittedly 2 maybe slightly overkill but 4 is perfectly acceptable. Most people these days have a decent computer of sorts which should be fine performance wise. [QUOTE=Chili Banan;19626558]I read that higher lightmap scales can slow down the rendering, I read in another thread that it was suggested to use lightmap scale 4. 1. If I am going to use lightmap scale 4, should I use it everywhere? 2. If 1 = yes, will it slow down the rendering as hell? 3. Is there a quick trick on changing the lightmap scales, or do I have to change it on every surface?[/QUOTE] 1. Why not. If you aren't planning on releasing then no problem but if you are going to finish or release the map then it may be an idea to consider file size as decreasing lightmap scales dramatically increase file size. 2. Not especially but you may want to test me on that. Do a bit of showbudgettexture in-game and see what is eating at your resources. 3. Go into View->Hide Objects. This will hide all entities in the level. As an optional addition it may be wise to then toggle the visibility of nodraw surfaces so that they cannot be seen. Then go into Edit -> Select All, open up Face Edit and turn down the lightmaps on all your surfaces. It's a quick rough way of doing it but you can always go back and tweak them more locally if you so wish.

[QUOTE=CoLD_IcE;19630045]I use 2 in most cases, lighting in source is really cheap as it's not rendered realtime. And I don't have any problems compiling it, there is something called lightmap optimization.[/QUOTE] Well yes, it's cheap to render, but using a lightmap scale of 2 on every single face is horrible lightmap optimisation. Compiling it would take [b]much[/b] longer with very little visible change in most cases.

[QUOTE=CoLD_IcE;19630045]I use 2 in most cases, lighting in source is really cheap as it's not rendered realtime. And I don't have any problems compiling it, there is something called lightmap optimization.[/QUOTE] Lightmap optimization would be the art of being intelligent enough not to use 2 on most faces, because in a lot of cases it's thoroughly necessary.

Not to mention that the lightmaps need to be stored on the GFX card's memory and as far as I am aware source cant mip map lightmaps. Longstory short: Higher Lightmap = Lower GFX RAM to use.

[QUOTE=SweetSwifter;19629474]Setting the lightmap scale to 1 is perfectly fine, if you have a computer that can compile it. For a full level, with major brush faces, count on about 6-10 hours of compiling time. I personally use 2 at the absolute smallest.[/QUOTE] Odd since you can't set the lightmap scale to 1 :3. 2,4,8,16,32

[QUOTE=omega322;19631358]Odd since you can't set the lightmap scale to 1 :3. 2,4,8,16,32[/QUOTE] Actually, you can. Try it. (2^0=1) Non-powers of 2 also work, I've always heard use powers of 2, and I always do out of habit, but no idea what the reasoning behind this is.

[QUOTE=metallics;19631392]Actually, you can. Try it. (2^0=1) Non-powers of 2 also work, I've always heard use powers of 2, and I always do out of habit, but no idea what the reasoning behind this is.[/QUOTE] I've read somewhere on this forum that it's got something with the memory to do. For some reason memory likes being an even number (2, 4, 8, etc). So for an example, let's say that the physical memory is stored in cubes. A block that is 8x8 fills up 4 cubes (2 + 2 + 2 + 2). A block that is 9x9 would fill up 4½. Now, if we create a new block, it can't use that ½ filled up cube, since it's already used by another block. That means it has to create a new cube to store memory in, wasting that ½ cube. I guess it works the same with any form of memory. This is only what I read, somewhere here on FP. I think it makes sense though.

[QUOTE=Chili Banan;19633089]I've read somewhere on this forum that it's got something with the memory to do. For some reason memory likes being an even number (2, 4, 8, etc). So for an example, let's say that the physical memory is stored in cubes. A block that is 8x8 fills up 4 cubes (2 + 2 + 2 + 2). A block that is 9x9 would fill up 4½. Now, if we create a new block, it can't use that ½ filled up cube, since it's already used by another block. That means it has to create a new cube to store memory in, wasting that ½ cube. I guess it works the same with any form of memory. This is only what I read, somewhere here on FP. I think it makes sense though.[/QUOTE] I spoke to Terrenteller about it, it's nothing like that. At one point GldSrc may or may not have required power 2 lightmap scales, but from what I know of memory it doesn't work in the manner in which you are describing it, because lightmap scale isn't really related to size, like you think. Lightmap scale defines the luxel density (distance between luxels). Luxels are "Light sampling spots" which Vrad uses to calculate shading on a face. Obviously, the more dense, the more accurately VRAD can plot shadows. It's like having a graph and you are taking measurements of x against y, the smaller increments of x you take measurements at, the more accurately you can plot a smooth curve through the data points. So basically the lightmap scales define lightmap memory size with respect to the face size. The larger the face, the more lightmap data for it. tl;dr lightmap scales can be whatever the hell you like.

[QUOTE=metallics;19633191]I spoke to Terrenteller about it, it's nothing like that. At one point GldSrc may or may not have required power 2 lightmap scales, but from what I know of memory it doesn't work in the manner in which you are describing it, because lightmap scale isn't really related to size, like you think. Lightmap scale defines the luxel density (distance between luxels). Luxels are "Light sampling spots" which Vrad uses to calculate shading on a face. Obviously, the more dense, the more accurately VRAD can plot shadows. It's like having a graph and you are taking measurements of x against y, the smaller increments of x you take measurements at, the more accurately you can plot a smooth curve through the data points. So basically the lightmap scales define lightmap memory size with respect to the face size. The larger the face, the more lightmap data for it. tl;dr lightmap scales can be whatever the hell you like.[/QUOTE] Oh, okay. That's good to know. I wasn't planning on making a lightmap scale 4 map, just saw a picture with a low lightmap scale, and since I didn't know anything about lightmaps I thought I'd might aswell ask.

[QUOTE=metallics;19633191]I spoke to Terrenteller about it, it's nothing like that. At one point GldSrc may or may not have required power 2 lightmap scales, but from what I know of memory it doesn't work in the manner in which you are describing it, because lightmap scale isn't really related to size, like you think. Lightmap scale defines the luxel density (distance between luxels). Luxels are "Light sampling spots" which Vrad uses to calculate shading on a face. Obviously, the more dense, the more accurately VRAD can plot shadows. It's like having a graph and you are taking measurements of x against y, the smaller increments of x you take measurements at, the more accurately you can plot a smooth curve through the data points. So basically the lightmap scales define lightmap memory size with respect to the face size. The larger the face, the more lightmap data for it. tl;dr lightmap scales can be whatever the hell you like.[/QUOTE] Sure? I tried setting it to 6 once and it automatically set it to 8 next time I looked. If I remember correctly.

[QUOTE=selby3962;19633281]Sure? I tried setting it to 6 once and it automatically set it to 8 next time I looked. If I remember correctly.[/QUOTE] Only displacements have a minimum lightmap scale. I tried it out a bit before I posted earlier. I set a face to lightmap scale of 15. I saved, compiled and closed hammer, the vmf still have the face set to a lightmap scale of 15 when I opened it in notepad, and the map worked fine.

[QUOTE=metallics;19633355]Only displacements have a minimum lightmap scale. I tried it out a bit before I posted earlier. I set a face to lightmap scale of 15. I saved, compiled and closed hammer, the vmf still have the face set to a lightmap scale of 15 when I opened it in notepad, and the map worked fine.[/QUOTE] Oh, yeah, maybe it was a displacement. Can't remember.