1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Suitable texture size

Discussion in 'Airport Design General' started by corkyo4, 12 Apr 2011.

  1. corkyo4


    4 Mar 2010
    I'm at the point of creating textures for my models but I'd like to know what the reasoning is behind the size of texture file I.e. 512x512, 1024x1024 etc.

    Is it simply the case that for large textures you use the larger size and for smaller texture items you use the smaller sizes?

    I'm concerned about performance and file size but I also don't want my textures to look stretched or blocky


  2. hcornea

    hcornea Resource contributor

    20 Apr 2007
    The answer lies with the design philosophy you are trying to employ.

    The ONLY advantage of smaller textures is marginally improved loading time, and reduced VRam use.

    The big problem with them, is that regardless of the size of the texture you are still using a drawcall, so using numerous smaller textures (say four 256x256 instead of a single 1024 x 1024 based material) is less efficient in sim.

    The ideal is to use 1024 x 1024 textures for static (non-animated objects). For animated parts (which will be a separate drawcall each) the texture size that provides enough space for your part, at the resolution you want.

    You may use larger textures (eg 2048 or 4096 square), but by default FSX will load the 1024 x 1024 Mipped version (if Mips are present) unless there is a custom line within the fsx.cfg ... which is unwieldy to make your scenery display properly. If you remove the mips FSX will most likely display the full resolution, but your textures will be dogged by flicker and moire patterns at a distance ... even with very high filtering settings.


    Static un-animated materials ... should use a 1024 square texture, with the texels mapped at whatever detail you need.

Share This Page