This would be a great idea, PNG is way smaller than JPEG and therefore would make it easier for LFSW.

yeah, it could be usefull the alpha channel on png too .. like the skin color do not be influenced by car color, only alpha channel...

+100

PNG files are normally bigger than a maximum quality jpg, but they do offer no quality loss. Whilst I normally like to use them I wonder if they wouldn't be too big for LFSW (which already uses auto compression AFAIK, not possible with a PNG). Maybe if we could have PNG in our skins folder and a PNG takes priority over a JPG with the same file name?

PNG mostly shows it's quality in smaller files (for instance small graphics in webpages). It's more of an alternative to GIF then to JPG.

But I just saved a 2048*2048 psd of one of my skins to jpeg and png. The jpg is 320KB, the PNG is 290KB. The filesize will probably vary per skin, the ammount of colors being one of the biggest factors, but still I think filesizes will be smaller or not much bigger.

Quote from joen :

PNG mostly shows it's quality in smaller files (for instance small graphics in webpages). It's more of an alternative to GIF then to JPG.

But I just saved a 2048*2048 psd of one of my skins to jpeg and png. The jpg is 320KB, the PNG is 290KB. The filesize will probably vary per skin, the ammount of colors being one of the biggest factors, but still I think filesizes will be smaller or not much bigger.

That's right. PNG is best for "digital" images, with sharp corners and big areas of one color.
So PNG might be a better for some skins, but for some skins it might not have any effect, or even an effect to the worse.

for baisic lines it's indeed a good idea, but as soon as you put some photo-like stuff in there, PNG file size will be huge compared to jpg

Maybe LFS World could allow both jpg and png, ofcourse keeping the 400KB limit. So people can decide for themselves what to use. People could test out what will work best with a specific skin and then decide.

PNG files are just too big.

Quote from Gunn :

PNG files are just too big.

Apart from the file size - What's the differences between PNG and JPG?

I.E. When comparing Bitmap and JPG - Bitmap is like more pixelly...

Quote from spsamsp :

Apart from the file size - What's the differences between PNG and JPG?

jpg uses lossy compression, PNG uses lossless compression
png supports transparency, jpg does not

Quote :

I.E. When comparing Bitmap and JPG - Bitmap is like more pixelly...

? Quite the other way around, as jpg files are compressed resulting in quality loss. bmp is not compressed (well, actually it can be, but it's rarely used)

Quote from joen :

PNG mostly shows it's quality in smaller files (for instance small graphics in webpages). It's more of an alternative to GIF then to JPG.

But I just saved a 2048*2048 psd of one of my skins to jpeg and png. The jpg is 320KB, the PNG is 290KB. The filesize will probably vary per skin, the ammount of colors being one of the biggest factors, but still I think filesizes will be smaller or not much bigger.

i bet you used the latest photoshop version, which has a damn bug, it fooles user when choosing extension, you probably just saved a file with png extension but with jpg file format and compression.
png is lossless and thus it is HUGE!

Advantage of having an alpha channel would be that it could be used as a gloss map, ie. stickers and other parts could be made less reflective.

Quote from joen :

jpg uses lossy compression, PNG uses lossless compression
png supports transparency, jpg does not



? Quite the other way around, as jpg files are compressed resulting in quality loss. bmp is not compressed (well, actually it can be, but it's rarely used)

Thanks for the explanation!!

Why bother? Seriously why? If you are racing you don't need to see them in all their detail. if you are spectating a race you don't need a compressionless format. The only time you'd want a really high quality skin is for close up screenshots and renders - in which case ask the driver/owner of the skin to supply you with a png version just for that.

I like the fact that LFS only shows 512 skins online, because it stops people wasting time talking about the nuances of skin layouts

Quote from Honey :

i bet you used the latest photoshop version, which has a damn bug, it fooles user when choosing extension, you probably just saved a file with png extension but with jpg file format and compression.
png is lossless and thus it is HUGE!

You're right. Damn, I didn't know about that. I just did the test again but now using IrfanView and it ends up a whopping 3 MB
I though it could be possible considering the big black areas in the skinfile and the relative low ammount of colour difference in this particular skin.

Thanks for pointing that out, I hereby completely withdraw my support for this idea

Quote from joen :

You're right. Damn, I didn't know about that. I just did the test again but now using IrfanView and it ends up a whopping 3 MB
I though it could be possible considering the big black areas in the skinfile and the relative low ammount of colour difference in this particular skin.

Thanks for pointing that out, I hereby completely withdraw my support for this idea

it's a shame for a great product like photoshop, to have such a stupid bug (introduced with latest version), i suggest to don't use the os dialog for saving...but the other is quite weird too
cheers

I don't know much about file types but if there's not much quality loss and it smaller I think it's a good idea.

I am all for PNG skins. I wan't to be able to adjust the reflection, that's why! It could be set up so that the more transparent a pixel is, the less transparent the reflection would be. So, full transparency on the PNG would make the material REALLY shiny.

Yeah that'd be cool.

Quote :

I am all for PNG skins. I wan't to be able to adjust the reflection, that's why! It could be set up so that the more transparent a pixel is, the less transparent the reflection would be

Sadly it doesn't work like that.

Technical Explanation
The environment map is a seperate texture layer using a different set of texture co-ordinates (in DX8 it will be box or sphere map co-ordinates). The environment map (which holds the reflection) completely ignores the UV data of the skin texture, if it didn't then the reflection would have to be rendered in the shape of each car skin - so every car and every track in LFS would need to have a special texture made just for the reflections and it would be an absolute pig to texture seem them (just ask anyone who makes skins where the design crosses two or more areas of the texture).

Therefor LFS takes the standard route and applies multiple surfaces to the object. What would actually happen if you used the alpha channel is that parts of that texture layer would be transparent and reveal other layers in the texture. From my estimation of what LFS is doing here, it's likely to reveal the reflection map and an invisible surface - altough it's possible there is a third texture layer I doubt it (using a 3rd texture layer could have serious ramifications on older graphics cards and LFS seems quite happy on old hardware).

Simple Explanation
It doesnt work like that. The alpha channel cannot be used to modify the display properties of the reflection map, which is completely independent of your skin picture.

My thoughts on other files
I preffer .tga over .png because it doesn't have the alpha channel and so results in smaller images. It is also lossless. However for any online game of this nature I think .jpg is the only sensible choice.

I would still like to download the 1024^2 version of peoples skins though, as an option in the graphics menu. I know some people dont see the point, but i'm sick of following other cars closely and looking at a really low res texture when the rest of the game i've got modded to look really nice. The lack of texture quality on other cars really does stand out when you are close to another driver.

People who dont want higher res textures are either using older hardware - which is fine, you dont have to enable a 1024^2 download option - or racing the BF1 and never see another cars rear wing close up.

I only read the first sentence of that post but yeah very informative.

Quote from Becky Rose :

Simple Explanation
It doesnt work like that. The alpha channel cannot be used to modify the display properties of the reflection map, which is completely independent of your skin picture.

Sure it can, and it would be in fact very easy (with a very simple pixel shader, might also be possible with the static pipeline).

I think, why change a formula thats working fine? Sure Scawen could make up some proprietary format and include a converter, but if jpeg is working fine, why mess with it?

For the same reason dogs lick their testicles; because they can.