Which is better?

[Vigilante212]

New pictures loaded I dont know how to reset the poll, so if you want to comment just comment

 

[Apom]

Mmmmh, I see no pictures...

 

[Vigilante212]

damn I thought the archives would show up on here

 

[A Boojum Snark]

I'm inclined to say the one on the left, but they both seem too detailed for TF2. The color splotches would need to be larger to fit.

 

[Sgt Frag]

I also think the left, same reason. The right is too detailed.

I like the left one alot, I wouldn't change it. It's the strong bump map that really doesn't look good in TF2.

 

[BagOfChips]

Left is more TF2ish imo.

 

[bomc]

i would say something in between, but if i had to choose i would choose the left one

 

[Kill_the_Bug]

I like the right -

 

[AntonJ3000]

Left is not enough, Right is too much IMO

 

[StoneFrog]

Something inbetween. The left looks like a piece of clipart from Microsoft Word, the right is too detailed. Maybe try detailing the left one a bit more without emphasizing the bumpmaps and depth.

 

[Vigilante212]

Well most people think the left looks better, but the votes are so split I think im going to work on it a bit more. I think what stone frog said maybe try emphazising the groute or the stones a bit more.

 

[Vigilante212]

I uploaded some new samples the old one on the left the new one on the right. I couldnt figure out how to reset the poll. so please comment on it.

 

[maxtraxv2]

cant tell one shot is 2 close = cant compare
they use the same thing in ads

 

[Vigilante212]

I dont know what ads have to do with anything, I can clearly see the difference in the 2 close up. This is why I included a close up shot and a far away shot.

 

[Jive Turkey]

I like the left. Looks good. Are you making a set of these?

 

[YM]

I think they both look far far too obviously photoshopped, Don't know if they have been or not but the lines between the colours are way too sharp and the contrast between neighbouring colours is too high. They both look quite flat too, not much shape definition in either. I'm, assuming they came from a real photo? If so try overlayign the photo on top at around 30% opacity to get some more definition in there. If you can use the brush tool at a lower opacity with some sampled colours to bring out highlights, add shadows or paint out any features you don't want.

 

[laghlagh]

I think they both look far far too obviously photoshopped, Don't know if they have been or not but the lines between the colours are way too sharp and the contrast between neighbouring colours is too high. They both look quite flat too, not much shape definition in either. I'm, assuming they came from a real photo? If so try overlayign the photo on top at around 30% opacity to get some more definition in there. If you can use the brush tool at a lower opacity with some sampled colours to bring out highlights, add shadows or paint out any features you don't want.

This, comapre with stock textures and you'll see they're actually very undetailed, like in a cel-shaded game.

 

[Vigilante212]

Yea I compared my first sample to the brick texture which is the only real one I could find that had some definiition and mine is actually about the same detail wise.

Yea I took a real world photo and I forget what effect I applied to it to make it look like it does lol. It wasnt a seamless photo though so ive had to retouch it since then. Its only going to be used as a texture for the foundation of some buildings in my friend and I's alpine map.

Making decent looking TF2 textures is harder then it looks. Ive been trying to make some from scratch and I just cant seem to get the brush strokes etc down properly to make them look good, but not too detailed.