Hi,
I’ve started working on converting my first livery into the MSFS2024 native format.
Looks like everything is working except the textures: The only thing I could think of is that I’m using a wrong format when exporting the .ktx2 files.
I haven’t found anything about this in the documentation. Is there a specific compression/format what we need to use?
I’m using the program called ImageViewer what was recommended in the documentation.
https://www.fsdeveloper.com/forum/threads/modelconverterx-msfs2024-object.459375/page-2#post-929182
Arno at FSDeveloper may have some insight here. You could bug Arno to develop a ktx2ToPng converter.
You shouldn’t create the KTX2 textures yourself: you can still use PNG, TIF or others, and the PackageBuilder will convert them to KTX2 when you actually build your package.
Best regards,
Eric / Asobo
@EPellissier
Thanks! I managed to do it.
However, I was looking for an option outside the sim, without using the PackageBuilder. Is there a specific requirement for how the ktx2 files needs to be saved? - And a recommendation for a texture editor/converter?
+1 for something outside the sim - as a non-marketplace livery painter, I’ve never used the package builder, preferring to create my liveries outside the sim (it’s just quicker).
(post deleted by author)
Do you mean that you directly modified files in packages instead of creating your own package in order to override the original files?
We know this was a potential (and bad) way of working in 2020, but this was never the official way to create or modify liveries. Creating a package through DevMode and using the official package builder is the only supported way.
It doesn’t mean that you are not able to use your favourite painting software and save your images as PNG, TIF or other.
Best regards,
Eric / Asobo
I believe we use a customised version of the KTX2 container for a variety of reasons.
What I think we are missing is an integrated convertor to the VFSProjector so that you can convert KTX2 to PNG or TIF or other on-the-fly.
I’ll check with the team on Monday regarding this.
Best regards,
Eric / Asobo
There are some workflows that depend on the ability to manually compose the final textures, such as custom mip-maps. If automatically generated mip-maps produce undesirable artifacts, we have the option in FS2020 to manually prepare and compress mip-maps into DDS files and use “Copy” asset group to add them to the package. I have used this extensively to control the glowing effect of highly emissive surfaces at different mip levels (which correlate with distance).
As @noolaero said it sometimes needed to do some textures manually. And of course in a lot of cases is way more easier and handier to do this outside of the sim.
The best solution would be a standalone KTX2 converter what can do both ways, or at least a plugin for the most popular image editors like Photoshop and paint.net what can handle the conversion in both ways.
Thanks for the explanation - I’ll check this with the appropriate team on Monday.
Best regards,
Eric / Asobo
I have a template package, and modify the cfg files manually. I sometimes also include a panel.cfg only if I want to change the characteristics of the tail number. I copy the DDS & json texture files as needed from the base plane, convert DDS to PNG, edit the textures using blender & paint.net, and convert them back to DDS.
I mean basically in most 2020 liveries there’s only 4 files that need editing - layout.json, manifest.json, aircraft.cfg & texture.cfg. In a lot of cases I can have the basic livery done in less time than it takes to start up the sim.
Nooooo, please! The PackageBuilder toolset is a worthy effort by Asobo to help some people put files in the right places, but the truth is it just copies files and creates layout.json (and in 2020 can convert PNG’s to DDS but I’ve always simply used DDS as my original image format). 99% of the remaining work will be fine-tuning the content of those files (complex gauges, complex animations, flight model) which the PackageBuilder process provides no value-add for at all. So in essence the PackageBuild helps with the initial step that is quite easy to replicate without the tool, and after that it’s not really useful.
This isn’t a criticism of the PackageBuilder tools, I know Asobo is trying to help some people, but when you’re forced through those awkward UI’s just to check the effect of a single line change in model XML or a flight model or a html/js gauge it really isn’t worth the marginal benefit of the tool updating layout.json and copying files.
