Sign in to follow this  
Voveriukas

Looking for 16x16 texture pack

Recommended Posts

Hey, is there any 16x16 texture packs compatible with AotBT? I don't want to use 32x32 or higher. Sphax has 16x16 texture, but AotBT update is 32x32 and higher.... Any suggestions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really. When it comes to big modpack the pretty much only choice your have is sphax, since it is the only one I know of which has the necessary community support to be rather complete.

The aotbt add on is a (in the meantime outdated) collection of various mod available throughout the sphax forum. And this is the problem. Most creators in the sphax forum are aiming for the higher resolution (mostly 64x and 128x) and often neglect the rest

At the moment I would say that there is no chance other then the 32x version of sphax (along with the add on) to reach the goal of a relatively complete ressource pack.

Worth a try (but with uncertain results) might be to take a high resolution version of the pack and add on and scale the images down with a bulk tool (like irfan view for example).

I don't how things will look then, but I fear that the result will be not what you are looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definitely second this assessment. The challenge with very low resolution texture packs is that there just isn't enough pixel data available to provide the detail. Resizing just a 64x texture set down to 16x entails disposing of 94% of the data. Higher resolution texture packs typically pursue a theme (as in Sphax) or some artistic direction (as in Soartex). This is possible because there is a much larger canvas on which to express the details required to convey the theme or direction. Without that larger canvas everything just starts to run together, and that's if the textures are crafted specifically for 16x. Resizing from higher resolutions to 16x is so lossy that whatever impression the larger textures were attempting to convey is completely lost.

 

For example: Take a look at this album: http://imgur.com/a/PTcw4 . These images are:

  • Sphax 512x texture for Thermal Expansion Igneous Extruder
  • Sphax 64x texture for Thermal Expansion Igneous Extruder
  • Sphax 16x texture for Thermal Expansion Igneous Extruder
  • Original texture from the mod's internal assets

Notice that at 16x the Sphax theme (pentagons) is lost completely and that the texture does not look clean at all. Obviously it tends to be an "eye of the beholder" thing, but I feel that the default textures look better than the 16x Sphax version.

Edited by plowmanplow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John Smith and Conquest are really nice packs when it comes to vanilla mc, but if you are looking for something to use in modded mc, basicly your only choice is sphax and if you want the broadest choice you have to go for at least 64x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. There is a world of difference between textures for Vanilla, and textures for modded MC. The Sphax pack for 1.7.10 has just over 800 texture files (not including CTM). The resource pack for one of my 1.7.10 packs has over 18000 texture files and is noticeably incomplete. There is still plenty of variety in the base textures from the mods (except for IC2... <shudder>), but with the sheer number of texture files you can start to see why fully developed texture sets for mods are not common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This really sad. Well you see I want to use texture pack on my PC and laptop. Laptop is not the most powerful. This is why I was looking for small texture pack. 

But thank you anyways. You guys helped me alot. :)

EDIT: But if I will use some kind of texture pack created for vanilla, the mods textures will be default anyways? 

Edited by Voveriukas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that is correct. the rp will only replace the textures it can and leave the rest untouched. depending on the pack this might result in some rather ugly results, because the styles are very different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this