How do you make words in textures crisp and clear?

[Elinah Iredell]

Hi. I have been tryting to put some artwork with words  inside a mesh frame and the words in it come out too blurry. There is a poem and I want it to  look clear even close up so it is easy to read , I used png textures. I have tried both normal and very high resolution but they sill look too blurry to me. I was wondering if anyone knows the best way to make words in a texture  come out looking crisp and clear?Is there a difference in clarity depending on which format is used .tga or .png? I do not want to give up on my project, but I do not like how it looks so far . .I would appreciate any advice . Thanks   .

[Madelaine McMasters]

Hi Elinah,

SL textures are limited to a maximum size of 1024x1024. While that's more than enough for most architectural or fashion textures, it's not enough for a wall of text. Both .tga and .png formats are lossless, so it doesn't make a difference which you use. Once in SL, everything is store in JPEG2000 format, so there is some loss of detail.

If you want walls of text, I'm afraid you'll have to split them across multiple textures. And when people cam in close, there's no way to avoid SL's soft scaling, which will fuzz up fine detail.

[Nalates Urriah]

Take a look around SL and see if you are finding text that is of acceptable quality. That will tell you if what you want to do is possible.

Madelaine McMasters is correct that all SL textures get scaled down to 1024x1024. SO, if you make a texture bigger, you will lose quality. Photoshop can do a better job of scaling images down or up than the SL process does.

Another problem is size and shape of the image. SL will shape the image into its nearest power of 2 size. Meaning:

64x64 or 64x32 or 512x1024 or 128x1024.... etc. If you use any size other than a power of 2, SL will resize the images, up or down, and you will lose quality.

The trick to getting the clearest text is having the display surface in SL match the image size ratio. So, an image you make that is 128w x1024h should only be placed on a surface that is 1:8 ... So, say you are using a cube then it should be 1 metter wide and 8 m tall... or 2 meters wide and 16 meters tall...

Another point to consider is understand how many pixels of screen the items will used when looked at 'normally'. I say normally because anyone can zoom in on anything to the point it goes fuzzy. Those that don't understand how this works tend to go with 1024x1024 textures, which just lags things. So a ring worn by an avatar that uses 3 or 4 1024 textures is a waste of resources. 

On Windows you can use the Snipping Tool to grab a screen capture sized closely to an object to approximate how many pixels are being used/needed. 512x512 and 256x256 images often give crisper, faster render results than 1024's.

Madelaine is right about using Tiff and PNG format images for your upload. AVOID JPG as the images is in a lossy format and it is going to be converted to a multi-size JPG2000, doubling the loss. A PNG or TIFF only goes through one lossy process and that gives you a better image.

You'll have to experiment with your size, shape, and pixel density to see what gives the best result.

[Elinah Iredell]

Thank you both for your replies. The idea of splitting the texture in half is interesting but I do not know if I can do that or not since it must be used as a rectangular shape inside a mesh picture frame. I chose mesh because I can get less land impact that way .I would llike to experiment with the idea though.

I did purchase a full perm frame in the long rectangle shape to match the length of the long poem. My math is not that good. Is approximating the shape of the texture good enough to get the clearest results? I will ask for further help if it is not.

Do you also know if there is a difference in clarity of textures with words put on prims, sculpts or mesh objects?

I have started looking around but it is harder to compare since most things do not have a long poem with many small words that I need to create, but I did see one poster for an upcoming event that looked  more clear compared to others.

[Madelaine McMasters]

Since readability is important in your situation, I would create a 1024x1024 texture. Don't make a habit of such large textures, as texture size is one of the biggest causes of scene loading delay and low frame rate. 1024x1024 is square, but your poem is long. So, create your poem in whatever graphics program you use, and do it at very high resolution.

Let's say your poem's aspect ratio is 1:3, meaning it's three times taller than it is wide. Create a blank canvas that's 1024W x 3072H and compose your poem on it. Export that as a .png or .tif, then open that exported file. Now resize it to 1024x1024. That'll squish the heck out of it, but that's fine, you're saving the maximum number of pixels that SL can accept. Save the squished file, upload it into SL and apply it to your prim face. The texture will be stretched back to the aspect ratio of your original poem. It won't look as good as the original, but it'll be the best you can get from 1024x1024.

The clarity of a texture on a rectangular face should not depend on whether that face is on a prim, a sculpt or a mesh object. However, sculpties can accept only one texture, so you're spreading those precious pixels over all the faces, not just the one of greatest interest. Mesh allows up to eight textures, so you can use lo-rez textures on unimportant parts, like frames, and hi-rez textures on the text.

I've never created a mesh object, so I don't know how texture count affects land impact. If should be possible to create a simple picture frame that has two or more textures in the artwork area. Then it just becomes a matter of cutting the poem into pieces and exporting each piece as a different texture. I will caution you about creating such a pixel intensive bit of art, as it will hog the texture memory of older graphics cards. A single 1024x1024 texture occupies between three and four megabytes of texture memory at full resolution. Make sure you save the files as 24 bit, and not 32 bit. There should be no transparency information in your poem, and sending an alpha (32 bit) texture into SL increases both storage and drawing load.

Show us a pic of your poem when you're done. I'm anxious to see it! In RL, I have a four foot tall, one foot wide copy of Robert Frost's "The Starsplitter" hanging on a wall. In SL, Robert Frost burned his "The Road Not Taken" into the rotating wooden shaft of my lighthouse. Mark Twain scribbled one if his inventions on my wall in chalk, Hedy Lamarr drew the first page of her patent for what would evolve into wi-fi using lipstick, and Richard Feynman sketched the backside of an exotic dancer on the wall using a charred stick from my fireplace.

If you'd like to see the mess they made during their drunken party, visit the lighthouse in Forgotten City.

;-).

[Elinah Iredell]

I worked on it yesterday and had much better results. I will also use your suggestions on the size of the texture. What I did was change the font from a fancy calligraphy font to a simple stronger font that was much easier to read. I also got rid of the side decorations and made the paragraphs larger. That also helped a lot. It is not as elegant and fancy looking as it was before but the test results I uploaded are much more legible I can see the words much clearer.I lrearned from this that if you want to use a fancy calligraphy font make sure the words are large, but if you need to use a lot of small words go for readability over looks. Much easier to read and much clearer looking text

. I had created it in 512 x1024  to approximate  the poem's long rectangle shape but i will try your suggestion of a squashed 1024x1024. I noticed on my full perm picture frames I bought that one has a separate face for the photo or artwork to be put into while the other has the area for the art  image shown on the same texture along with the sides of the picture frame and I must fit the art image onto the texture by making it much smaller. I would think that would not look as good in sl, as a separate face for the art image. I do like that frame though.

My research online shows that png is much smaller for the exact same images as tga , I was using tga. I would bet then that a 1024 texture using png creates much less lag in sl  then a 1024 in tga. Of course since everything is changed to jpeg 2000 here (I think ) maybe it does not matter?

I will visit the place you mentioned, the Forgotten City.thanks for the invite.

[Drongle McMahon]

"I would bet then that a 1024 texture using png creates much less lag in sl  then a 1024 in tga."

Sadly, I'm afraid you would lose that bet. Both are lossless storage methods. Png is compressed, while tga isn't. So the data read into the viewer (and decompressed for png) when you upload is exactly the same. The viewer then converts the image to JPEG2000 (a lossy compression method) before uploading it to the asset server, and it's that JPEG2000 that gets downloaded again to viewers looking at your texture. So with identical input data, the uploaded and downloaded data size will be identical, irrespective of which of these two on-disc formats you started with. You will save space on your disc though with png. More important, by making sure you have no alpha channel, you can reduce all of them, including the JPEG2000.

[Coby Foden]

---

Elinah Iredell wrote:

My research online shows that png is much smaller for the exact same images as tga , I was using tga. I would bet then that a 1024 texture using png creates much less lag in sl  then a 1024 in tga. Of course since everything is changed to jpeg 2000 here (I think ) maybe it does not matter?

---

The texture file size on disk has nothing to do with how much graphics memory the texture uses inworld.

The only things what determine the graphics card memory usage are:

 

• texture size in pixels

• texture bit depth (32bit vs 34bit)

 

So it does not matter at all whether you use PNG or TGA file format in uploading the textures (JPG should be avoided because it degrades the quality). And as was mentioned already, at upload the textures are converted to JPEG2000 format what SL uses internally in storing the textures on the servers.

In the link below there is a list of all the texture sizes what SL uses and how much memory they use (32bit textures have alpha channel, 24bit textures have no alpha channel):

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Texture_sizes

[Elinah Iredell]

Thank you all for your replies . Madelaine had written that there is not a difference between a texture on a prim a sculpt or a mesh but if that is the case then why do the textures on mesh and sculpted hair look so flat compared to the textures on prim hair?

 I attempted to save my full perm mesh frames onto my computer and then re upload then onto the beta  grid to test different textures without having to pay each time . Anyway while it uploaded okay the textures do not look the same on the frames in beta as they do on the main grid. I know there are other other  types of  textures that come with the mesh frame but not sure how to put them on or upload them they seem to be used separately. This is all new to me. What did I do wrong that the picture frame textures do not look the same ? It would be a lot easier to test my textures in beta if I could .

[Madelaine McMasters]

You needn't use the beta grid for texture testing. Local textures are free, and a much more efficient way to test. Here's Rolig Loon's explanation...

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Rolig_Loon/Local_Textures

The neat thing about local textures is that they are hosted on your computer, not in SL's servers. Rather than downloading a texture from SL and storing it in the viewer's cache, the viewer goes directly to the specified local texture file. So, if you make a change to that texture, it's immediately reflected in-world. That saves the time and hassle of uploading a texture and applying it to a prim face. You just do that once, then edit away on your texture. Every time you save your work, it updates in-world.

I can't speak to any difference you see between sculptie/mesh hair and prim hair. I've applied textures to both prims and sculpties and seen no difference in their display.

I also can't explain why you see things differently on the beta grid.

Post some snapshots, so we can see what you're talking about!

[Coby Foden]

A reminder to: Elinah Iredell

Your local textures cannot be seen by anybody else, only you can see them.

Therefore when you have played with local texture and are finally satisfied with it, then you must upload it to SL so that others will be able to see it too.

[Elinah Iredell]

Wow I truly thank you all for telling me about the feature of being able to upload local textures to the main grid. You have saved me heaps and gobs of frustration by this. .I was so happy when I just tried. it ! The lighting on beta grid just is not the same and sometimes that does matter . Especially when I have been trying to experiment with skin creating. I would think it looked good in beta then upload it to the main grid and it didn't look the same. I need to keep updated on all these great new features when they first come out or they seem to just pass me by. Thanks.

 

About the hair textures. I took a photo in sl of an old hair I have that is both sculpt on top and prim on the bottom. Even though this is a sculptie top I have seen the same issue with mesh hair. The textures are the same for the sculpt top and the prim bottom and yet if you notice the sculpted texture looks dull and flat and the prim texture looks shiny and greaming. It is even worse with dark hair..On the new mesh hair I bought the dark textures look dull with no highlight or definition at all just like flat dark paint around my avatar's head. Or maybe because they are often created with the use of a hud  applier? Is that part of the problem ?

 

 

[Drongle McMahon]

Looks to me like a UV mapping issue. The texture on the "top" is too stretched out. Increasing repeats. in one direction or both, might help. The sculpty UV map is fixed, which does place severe constraints on what you can do with texturing. With mesh, however, you can do anything you like. So proper UV mapping for good texturing of mesh is entirely dependent on the skill and effort of the creator.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Drongle McMahon wrote:

Looks to me like a UV mapping issue. The texture on the "top" is too stretched out. Increasing repeats. in one direction or both, might help. The sculpty UV map is fixed, which does place severe constraints on what you can do with texturing. With mesh, however, you can do anything you like. So proper UV mapping for good texturing of mesh is entirely dependent on the skill and effort of the creator.

---

It is a UV mapping/texturing issue. I see this in prim attachments to system clothing all the time. I have a gingham check blouse with rolled cuffs. The check pattern on the prim cuffs is about 3x finer than that on the system layer blouse. I have several skirts with prim panels that exhibit the same problem.

I once chatted with the creator such a skirt. She used mesh for the panel, with a wool texture that was at least 2x the pitch of the pants layer texture. Although the prim panel matched the color of the rest of the skirt, the patterns were clearly different, as in the hair example we're looking at now.

I patiently explained the problem, and how to fix it quickly by reducing the prim panel texture repeat to 0.5 or so, and to fix it properly by exporting the texture from her design program at a lower resolution. I got a response of approximately "Why would I ever produce clothing at less than maximum texture resolution, you don't know what you are talking about. Take your nonsense elsewhere."

I took my nonsense, and my business, elsewhere.

[Elinah Iredell]

I would be very interested to learn all the tips and tricks I can to create the cleanest clearest textures. I have a lot to learn. I still need to understand uv maps and such. I also do not understand just like the creator you talked to of why a 512 can look clearer than a 1024 ? Also does a hair texture with a transparency alpha layer look clearer than a hair that has no transparency ? I have read you cannot use transparencies on mesh ?  And does the use of appliers for texturing like in a fatpack with more than one color choice affect how clear the texture looks also ?

 

PS. Madelaine I forgot to mention I did visit the lighthouse at the Forgotten city. I liked the Alice in Wonderland secret door and the clock with numbers that crash to the ground when the time changes. Very creative.

[Coby Foden]

---

Elinah Iredell wrote:

The lighting on beta grid just is not the same and sometimes that does matter. Especially when I have been trying to experiment with skin creating. I would think it looked good in beta then upload it to the main grid and it didn't look the same.

---

That you see the lighting in the BETA grid differently than in the main grid is most propably due to that you have different Windlight setting and different time of day on those two grids. Naturally then the lighting indeed will look different.

When you actually do have the same the Windlight and same time of day on both grids, then the lighting should look exactly the same on both grids. At least I haven't noticed any difference in the lighting when the settings are the same on both grids.

[LlewLlwyd]

You should consult a German guy called Manny Hans, since he is a wizard at getting the right lighting settings.

As everybody knows:

Manny Hans make light work.

[Madelaine McMasters]

Alpha textures would look no more or less clear than non-alpha. Alpha textures work the rendering engine harder because it must still render objects behind such textures. If an opaque texture complete obscures an object behind it, the renderer can completely skip the obscured object. Alpha textures, even if opaque, obscure nothing. They also take more texture memory, as they contain an extra channel (the alpha channel) to specify transparency.

As for how a 512x512 texture might look sharper than a 1024x1024, it's all about display scale. Imagine you texture a huge wall of your house with a 1024x1024 texture. Now imagine you hang a tiny photograph on that wall and drop a 512x512 texture on it. When you look closely at the photo, it'll be sharp and the wall will be fuzzy. This is what's happening in the hair you showed us, and on the gingham check blouse I own. System layer clothing textures are all applied to the avatar at 512x512. A shirt layer texture covers the front and back of the torso and one arm (the arm part of the texture is mirrored for the other arm, saving pixels).

The prim sleeves for that blouse are small things, and also textured at 512x512. So, the texture sharpness doesn't match. There are far more pixels per inch in the cuff than on the blouse. Had the designer used a 128x128 texture on the cuffs, they'd be a better match for the blouse. It was the same for the mesh skirt. Half of the skirt was on the avatar pants layer, the other half in a mesh prim panel. The prim panel was textured at 1024x1024, even though it was less than half as long as the avatar bottom. So there was far more detail in the panel than in the avatar layer portion of the skirt.

And as for UV mapping, that's the name for the way we correlate pixels in a flat rectangular texture with their actual position on complex 3D shapes. Here's an example of the SL avatar torso UV map. It's the guideline to show you where the things you draw will go on the avatar. If you wanted to put a mole on your elbow, the map would show you where to draw it in the 512x512 space. I've never made a mesh object, but I imagine the design tools create UV maps for you (most likely with your help), so you know how to design your textures to fit.

And you can see that a good number of the pixels of a UV map texture can go wasted, as they don't map to anything visible. So it's important to design your 3D objects to minimize unused UV map space when you can. Notice that the avatar top template has only one set of arm textures (top and bottom), even though we have two arms. This is why you cannot tattoo only one arm via clothing layer items. The arm is mirrored to make best use of the limited texture space.

And I'm glad you like my little doors and falling clock. They are creative, and they're the work of Pandora Wrigglesworth. You can find them for sale at her Curio Obscura shop, along with many other amusing things.

[Elinah Iredell]

Thank you for the great advice. Well the texture tests are in using the main grid local texture option you told me about I tested 3 textures for the poem. The first was for a full perm frame that did not have a separate face for the poem texture so I had to shrink my poem down to fit the area shown on the template where the art image should go . Though it was small the shape fit the poem very well.

The next one was a large rectangular full perm frame with a separate texture face for my poem, I created both a 512 x 1024 to approximate  the shape of the poem a final texture was by taking the advice to create a square shape of 1024 x 1024 to get all the pixels I could into the image and sl would then squash it into the right shape afterwards

The best one was the squashed 1024x1024 ! It looks great! I never would have thought to squash it like that I would probably have kept the 512 x 1024 because it was the shape of the poem. Now I have something that is so clear, and that I feel  proud of. Thanks you so much.

[Madelaine McMasters]

I'm glad you were able to make something you're proud of, Elinah!

Ain't creating fun?

[Traci Jameson]

THIS is the explanation I've been looking for.  Thank you... now if I can just properly understand and apply it...

[Folass]

I'm wondering if this will help me also.I texture full perm clothes for TD and Bebe. And when u texture the cloths if you get real close to the outfit it gets real blurry.How do i fix this? is it the 1024x1024 i need to use? I use Picmonkey to texture my cloths. Is that the problem?

[Kyrah Abattoir]

On the subject of text, if you alpha mask your text, depending of the font, you can get some pretty sharp lines at a very low resolution.

4 hours ago, Folass said:

I'm wondering if this will help me also.I texture full perm clothes for TD and Bebe. And when u texture the cloths if you get real close to the outfit it gets real blurry.How do i fix this? is it the 1024x1024 i need to use? I use Picmonkey to texture my cloths. Is that the problem?

If you focus too much on tiny unimportant surface details (like fabric weave) you will never feel like you have enough pixels to go around.

In addition, if the mesh you are texturing makes poor use of the texture space, you end up with most of it wasted.