KB Question

[Daise2]

I am being a total noob here....but after a heated debate with some creator friends, I have my knickers in a twist, so coming here to be unraveled and straightened out

So. As an example.... I have a room mesh, and there a small light fitting in the room which a plain black texture already there, placed by the mesher. That black texture is a big ol 512x256 sized plain mat black texture. In the past I would have replaced that big texture with a small 2x2 black texture. Now, not that long ago, on the old forums, I had read and understood that if I did that, I was simply adding my 2x2 texture onto the already existing mesher supplied 512x256 texture. not replacing the kb weight but adding to it. So actually, its best to not replace those sort of textures if its only about putting in a smaller version in.

The debate I am having with the friend is that she says my texture would override, replace and remove the meshers texture and associated kb weight.

Can someone clarify this for me please?

[MandaMarie]

Well, it is true that the original mesh comes loaded with those textures you find. By replacing that texture can help you though. It kinda depends on the mesh though. So if you have a 512X256 texture showing and nothing else in the room uses that same 512X256 texture, by replacing it you now cause your room to only load the 2X2 you added. Yes, that original 512X256 is still within the mesh, but once your room is published and when you load into the room, it does not load the 512X256. Instead, you are only loading the 2X2 while your Avi is in the room. The 512X256 still remains within the mesh file if you were to say, rederive off that room a second time.

Another example is, say the mesh comes with a chair built in. You could remove that mesh from the room. Yes, the file still exists within the total product, but once you publish the room, and then visit it, it does not load for you.

[gaf210]

Well I've asked this to another creator and yes, they confirm that a derivation is never less in weight than the product derived from, then all changes sum up on its weight.

I couldn't confirm on what loads and what not once in the client, if the entire product assets or only the ones visible.

[Zara]

The debate I am having with the friend is that she says my texture would override, replace and remove the meshers texture and associated kb weight.

Anything you add will never remove a parent asset, it will only increase the total size of the product in terms of displayed kbs however, as Gaf alludes to, the way in which it affects the item's performance in the client is hard to say.

You are correct that swapping a 512x256 opacity for a 2x2 does nothing but add to the kb total. Go tell your friend nur nur from me.

[Daise2]

Thank you all for explaining - I was thinking I'd misunderstood it all. For so many years I swapped out high kb textures for far smaller ones thinking I was doing the right thing....I didn't realise the meshers original texture was still there somewhere.

I am curious on the behaviour of those assets in the client, as you all mentioned. I wonder if there is anyone staff-wise who would know.

@Zara...I am getting ready to nurr nurr

[Zara]

I am curious on the behaviour of those assets in the client, as you all mentioned. I wonder if there is anyone staff-wise who would know.

I think the only staff members who really understood the program left quite a while ago but good luck with getting a sensible or even coherent answer from the current bunch.

[wBlackWolfw]

Well I've asked this to another creator and yes, they confirm that a derivation is never less in weight than the product derived from, then all changes sum up on its weight.

I couldn't confirm on what loads and what not once in the client, if the entire product assets or only the ones visible.

It makes sense for me since the kbs are different on client, this room for example is 2,689 KB on brownser and is 1,494 kb on client:

Gold Arabian Moonlight

[MandaMarie]

Let's see if I can explain this and not sound like a bumbling and rambling goofball. ;p

First off, why is it you are trying to lower the KB of the room? There are two things to think about. First is when you load into say... Let's take a public room for an example. You click join and load in. See all the bars dropping down, and the spiraling loading circles? Those are loading everything in the room as well as yourself, any people, and the actual room. Pretend nobody is in said room. Let's also ignore you, yourself. So the room is nothing but one cube in front of where you land. It is a 256 by 256 by 256 cube floating in front of you. The only other thing in this room is one light source behind you. Let's pretend this room is 1KB in size. Okay so see that cube in front of you? If you do, your video card does as well. You know that light behind you? Well, its casting lighting updates on all 6 sides of that cube as well. Your video card has to render this and update everything you see as you move your camera around it, and look at the cube from different angles.

Okay so let's back out of there. Now, find the link to that room and let's derive off it. Open it in create and upload a 2X2 solid black texture. Now, add that black texture to that cube's opacity layer and apply it. The cube should disappear. Upload your room and wait for peer review. Once done open it as a public room and join it.

Now you will see all the same loading bars and everything as you did before. Yes, your room is now higher in KB all because of adding that one 2X2 texture. But here is the thing. See the cube now? No? Well, your video card isn't rendering it. Nor is your video card trying to update lighting on any surface of that cube. It's still there yes. You loaded it when you joined the room but, your experience is going to be smoother cause your video gets to completely and 100% ignore any and every part of that cube.

It's just how 3D rendering works. If you can't see it, your video card can't either. That means less work for it to do while rendering anything else in the room. A 2X2 solid black texture takes probably no time at all to load. I highly dought even the most sophisticated software could even tell a performance drop in now having to load another 2X2 texture.

[MandaMarie]

For the lulz!

So I made a 2 by 2 pixel .jpg and here is what it shows me the file size is.


So 539 bytes, I say we look to see how long it would take to download this texture.



So even on the oldest way of downloading, a 28,8 kbit/s modem doesn't even register 1 second to download. Imagine the impact this same texture would have on today's current DSL or Cable.

The main thing is, I understand we want the lowest KB and best performance we can get. But, should it be at the cost of making our rooms look good? If you see something in a room, or on clothing and don't like it, just hide it. I don't think a few KB really hurts when we want things to look good. As for myself, well if I don't like how something looks, I have 6 16 by 16 black .jpg textures all with different names I apply to things all the time. Even a 16 by 16 isn't really that large of a file that it is going to lower performance that much.

[Daise2]

I am curious on the behaviour of those assets in the client, as you all mentioned. I wonder if there is anyone staff-wise who would know.

I think the only staff members who really understood the program left quite a while ago but good luck with getting a sensible or even coherent answer from the current bunch.

I was afraid of that lol

I wonder if ShannonMac would know

[Daise2]

For the lulz!

So I made a 2 by 2 pixel .jpg and here is what it shows me the file size is.


So 539 bytes, I say we look to see how long it would take to download this texture.



So even on the oldest way of downloading, a 28,8 kbit/s modem doesn't even register 1 second to download. Imagine the impact this same texture would have on today's current DSL or Cable.

The main thing is, I understand we want the lowest KB and best performance we can get. But, should it be at the cost of making our rooms look good? If you see something in a room, or on clothing and don't like it, just hide it. I don't think a few KB really hurts when we want things to look good. As for myself, well if I don't like how something looks, I have 6 16 by 16 black .jpg textures all with different names I apply to things all the time. Even a 16 by 16 isn't really that large of a file that it is going to lower performance that much.

Its always going to be a balance of great textures vs kb weight. I think there is an argument these days for allowing rooms in particular more weight. Although I personally make rooms usually around 600-800mb...I've had the very unpleasant experience of working with the odd room mesh that comes in at around 1600mb+ before I've even started to put in my textures. A 'recent' room competition is the one that sticks in my mind. I was losing so much quality on my textures, having to reduce them to 16x16 or less when they looked their best around the 256x256 mark. With today' upload/download speeds with DSL and cable, surely imvu could increase the room sizes a bit to help us out on those particularly heavy meshes.

[SirenaRoga]

Something I've always done (and then wondered if it's a waste for the same reason that Daise mentioned re swapping out textures) is resize 512x512 maps that meshers provide (and some upload) to 256x256. So I know that IMVU does something to the 512x512 textures because it's not a recognised size but does my uploading the correct size do anything because my understanding has always been that the file size which IMVU actually loads for me in create have already been scaled down from 512x512. Is that correct?

[Daise2]

Something I've always done (and then wondered if it's a waste for the same reason that Daise mentioned re swapping out textures) is resize 512x512 maps that meshers provide (and some upload) to 256x256. So I know that IMVU does something to the 512x512 textures because it's not a recognised size but does my uploading the correct size do anything because my understanding has always been that the file size which IMVU actually loads for me in create have already been scaled down from 512x512. Is that correct?

Going by what everyone else is saying, you are adding the weight of your 256x256 to the meshers 512x512....but how that affects the product in the client is the question. I would think by removing the incorrectly sized texture, imvu wont need to resize in it the wierd nasty way that it does - not sure though