Photoshop or XSI..which one to make the textures?

tigersmith

Which one would you say works easier/better?

RSX

The apps you listed are totally two different ends of a stick.

XSI is more geared towards modeling, animation, particle ceation, crowd beheivor and compositing. You're only gonna need this if you wanna model or animate things for source. You can render textures from XSI using the rendermap tool, but these will take a lot longer too set up properly, then by drawing them in photoshop.

Photoshop is more geared towards creating textures. If your not willing to shed out $700 or whatever the price is. Gimp and Paint Shop Pro are similar programs, that can achieve the same results with abit of time and effort. Gimp also as a normal map plugin, that will let you generate normal maps from greayscale bump maps.

Hope this helps.

Depot

I agree, Photoshop is the way to go IF you've got the bucks.

GiGaBiTe

Paint.net is a free alternative, and is pretty close to photoshop. It doesn't have near as many effect filters but I don't use those much anyways.

<a href="http://www.getpaint.net/" target="_blank">http://www.getpaint.net/</a>

TychoCelchuuu

The GIMP is the best free alternative to Photoshop. XSI isn't even an option for making textures.

Spacer

XSI can render out normal maps that look far more realistic than the ones that photoshop can produce. Thusly, use a combination of the two.

SpaceJesus

<!--quoteo(post=1568555:date=Sep 30 2006, 06:07 AM:name=Spacer)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Spacer @ Sep 30 2006, 06:07 AM) [snapback]1568555[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
XSI can render out normal maps that look far more realistic than the ones that photoshop can produce.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Nope. In many cases (for example cloth and material textures) normal maps hand painted in photoshop are much more realistic, for much less effort.

Spacer

Yes, but the vast majority of other textures are easier to do in XSI. Zbrush would also help.

RSX

Finer Details such as stiching in clothing and skin pores, are better suited to using reqular greyscale height maps as these offer more detail/accuracy when simulating small convex/concave materials.

Xsi and other 3d apps will offer more accurate results than photoshops plugin because your only painting height maps that are being converted to normal maps and thus the accuracy is lost.

SpaceJesus

True, but with very small details the accuracy is not warranted, and by doing those small details through the photoshop plugin method you can improve your workflow and still achieve almost the same effect.

Lt_Gravity

<!--quoteo(post=1568476:date=Sep 29 2006, 03:11 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Sep 29 2006, 03:11 PM) [snapback]1568476[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
The GIMP is the best free alternative to Photoshop.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

And if you are used to programs like PS you have a really hard time to lern the basics on gimp -_-
Just too complicated for my taste.

TychoCelchuuu

Uh, that's probably just you. The GIMP is no more complicated than Photoshop. Besides, I don't think tigersmith is used to PS anyways.

Lt_Gravity

<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink-fix.gif" />

Besides that I admire all those who are able to create usable textures. That´s something I can´t do properly <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad-fix.gif" />

tigersmith

<!--quoteo(post=1569977:date=Oct 14 2006, 08:52 PM:name=TychoCelchuuu)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TychoCelchuuu @ Oct 14 2006, 08:52 PM) [snapback]1569977[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Uh, that's probably just you. The GIMP is no more complicated than Photoshop. Besides, I don't think tigersmith is used to PS anyways. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->



I dont? I know alot about PS CS2 lol



check some of the images i have done and webpage design layout i did for my website.. all custom lol

J!

<!--quoteo(post=1568408:date=Sep 29 2006, 12:01 PM:name=tigersmith)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tigersmith @ Sep 29 2006, 12:01 PM) [snapback]1568408[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
Which one would you say works easier/better?
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Hmm... if it's any help--for NS and NS:S texture work I use Photoshop CS2.

Maya sometimes for normal maps (usually nvidia's filter is faster).

TychoCelchuuu

<!--quoteo(post=1570225:date=Oct 16 2006, 01:39 PM:name=tigersmith)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tigersmith @ Oct 16 2006, 01:39 PM) [snapback]1570225[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->
I dont? I know alot about PS CS2 lol



check some of the images i have done and webpage design layout i did for my website.. all custom lol
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

I just assumed that, because you were asking if you should make textures with a 2d program (duh) or a 3d program (huh), you had no experience with either program or with textures at all.