A question about high res textures in Second Life

Take me home with you

Take me home with you

This morning I started working on some new images for my in-world gallery. It’s nice to get into the zone of setting up a shot, choosing windlight and snapping some shots. I did my first new image this morning and I’m ready to upload it to SL to put on a prim, but I have a question about texture size. So if there any knowledgeable people about this topic reading, I would appreciate your input.

I’ve heard the theory that 1024 x 1024 textures are responsible for creating lag. I am not a techie person so I have no theories of my own on this. I do notice that objects that have this size texture take longer to load on my laptop. I want to upload my images to hang on a wall and not lose too much sharpness or quality when they are resized. So my question is what is the best size for uploading a texture to create an art wall hanging in Second Life?

If anyone has any insight on this, I would love to hear your thoughts!

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “A question about high res textures in Second Life

  1. Whiskey Day

    I upload mine at 2048. I’m a snob like that. The SL10B builds are limited to 512 sized textures, for ease of rezzing, but my home (and likely yours, your gallery, etc) is located on a residential sim that rezzes easily. I assume most people hang my work in their home. But there are folks who will fuss that you’re adding to overall lag by uploading large textures. They may be right.

    Reply
    1. Carrie Lexington Post author

      Yeah, my thoughts are pretty much the same. I’d rather upload them larger, but then someone made a big fuss about SL10B greeters/hosts wearing attachments with large textures and it got me to thinking about it – not that this has anything to do with SL10B.

      I’m pretty conscious about my contribution to lag but I also don’t want to compromise quality for an art photo. I just want people to be able to resize the wall hanging and not lose quality when it goes bigger. I textured a prim with a 512 photo and I noticed that the image got a little fuzzy when I made it larger.

      Thanks!

      Reply
  2. Bear Silvershade

    I do mine as large as possible too Carrie. The lag is created more by repeating large textures as I understand it, like doing a wall with a 1024 square pattern. And while it might take a large texture a little more time to rezz, in the case of an image — my image — I want it to look its best.

    Reply
      1. Mona Eberhardt

        In most cases, 512×512 textures are more than enough to get by – just consider that our displays rarely have a native resolution higher than 1920×1080 (and not all of us have graphics cards capable of running SL with all its eyecandy at such a resolution). Not that 1024×1024 textures don’t have their uses, though: they can serve as a good starting point to make smaller, faster-loading ones.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s