Equivalent BMP to DDS texture formats?

I'm converting a few .bmp textures to .dds (remembering to flip image and alpha) on some aircrafts with DXTbmp and wondering what the best .dds format is to use.

If I get a 32 bit .bmp, I've been converting them to 8.8.8.8 .dds

What about 16 bit DXT5 2048x2048 .bmp's?

DXT5 .dds or would 5.5.5.1 or 4.4.4.4 be a better choice?

Thanks, Jack

My first question would be, why bother?

With your PC specs I doubt you are going to gain anything by converting any textures that already work.

What you might do is lose (not loose) some quality by compressing files.

If you have DXT5 textures, they are already .DDS textures, by definition.

If you must convert them, use the same format you start with. That is, if your original is DXT5, use DXT5.

May I suggest you read this Wiki about texture formats- http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Texture_formats_overview

peace,

the Bean

Thanks for the link Mr. Bean

Why? .dds is the native texturing method for FSX, .bmp's must be flipped on-the-fly for GPU processing. Any new payware aircraft I get is in .dds for a reason I'm sure.

Besides it's FUUUNNNNN :)

Found this...

16 bit Extended BMP

Introduced with FS2000 this format allowed greater colour depth than 8 bit. Instead of 256 colours you could now use the full “HiColor” range of 65536 colours.

Again the textures can be any size that is a “power of 2” in width and height.

There are several variations of the 16 bit format for use in different situations :-

565 - For general use where no Alpha is required

555-1 - For use when a simple on/off Alpha is needed.

444-4 - For use when several levels of Alpha are wanted.

Assigning bits as Alpha will necessarily reduce the number of bits available for the colour data so that while 565 allows the full 65536 colours to be used 555-1 will only have 32768 colours available and 444-4 only 4096.

I guess I'll just use DXT5 .dds for the 16 bit .bmp's

Why? .dds is the native texturing method for FSX...

That explains all of the .bmp files that come with FSX.

Are you doing this for FSX native models? Or ported over FS9 models that know nothing of FSX materials?

... .bmp's must be flipped on-the-fly for GPU processing.

1) are you concerned that you are overtaxing your Titan?

2) .DDS textures get flipped too, BTW

Any new payware aircraft I get is in .dds for a reason I'm sure.

Again, are you converting files for FSX native models or FS9 models that do not support FSX materials?

Besides it's FUUUNNNNN :)

I would rather spend my time flying. ;)

Found this...

 

16 bit Extended BMP...

 

There are several variations of the 16 bit format for use in different situations :-

 

565 - For general use where no Alpha is required

555-1 - For use when a simple on/off Alpha is needed.

444-4 - For use when several levels of Alpha are wanted.

You do not want to use any of those formats unless image quality is of no concern to you.

Especially if you start with a 32 bit image.

I guess I'll just use DXT5 .dds for the 16 bit .bmp's

You cannot go wrong there, your PC specs should handle it.

Although, if your source image has no Alpha I would use DXT1 w/no Alpha. You end up with a file half the size of DXT5.

The only difference between DXT3 and DXT5 is what they offer for the Alpha channel, so there is no real advantage in using DXT3.

peace,

the Bean

J-E-E-E-Z-E... Now I know what a dissected frog feels like :D

Anyways, I was working on a Carenado Centurion. Some of the textures were already .dds and I just did the rest of them. Any 32bit bmp's I saved as 8888 .dds, and the 16bit bmp's, saved as DXT5 .dds

Here is the end result...

I looked it over carefully and didn't see any obvious texture degradation and am pleased with the way it came out.

J-E-E-E-Z-E... Now I know what a dissected frog feels like :D

 

Anyways, I was working on a Carenado Centurion. Some of the textures were already .dds and I just did the rest of them. Any 32bit bmp's I saved as 8888 .dds, and the 16bit bmp's, saved as DXT5 .dds

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]194153[/ATTACH]

 

Here is the end result...

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]194154[/ATTACH]

 

I looked it over carefully and didn't see any obvious texture degradation and am pleased with the way it came out.

Whatever. :rolleyes: If you're happy, keep on keeping on. ;)