Quote:

The modeler has already said that the texture is of 1024x1024 and yet you assume that it is of 512x512.



Please learn to read. I never said that it was a 512 x 512 texture. Here is my quote:

Quote:

It has a decent sized skin (1024 x 1024), but it looks like a model with a 512 x 512 skin.



Notice that I said, "It has a decent sized skin (1024 x 1024)". What does that mean? It means that I fully recognize that the skin used is 1024 x 1024 pixels (as he says in his original post). However, the details on the texture (or lack, thereof) do not make the model LOOK like it is using a 1024 skin, but rather one that LOOKS like a 512 skin. Get your facts straight or learn to read.

Quote:

please mind your language.



I did not cuss or swear. And, if you read what I wrote, then you will see that I told us BOTH to SHUT UP (not just you). The word "shut" is a common English word. It is not slang and it is not improper. It means: to close. To "shut up" is to stop speaking because the mouth is closed. In this case, it would mean to stop posting off topic in this thread and, yeah, I need to heed my own advice .

Quote:

When I say that I am not going to re-uv or anything that you know of then still you insist that I am wrong.



You're right. I am insisting that you are wrong or that you are over-simplifying the process. If I am wrong ... oh, well.

Quote:

I think that you should appologise for this.



Keep thinking. It will do you good. However, prove me wrong and I will. But your insistence does not prove anything. I can insist that I can fly, but that does not make it so.

Quote:

You could challenge me by sending any model and see what I can do with it. Instead you talking [censored].



Now who has to watch their language? Nothing I wrote had to be censored. Sheesh.

No. Sending you a model would prove nothing. I would not be able to see the process. I would only get back a completed model. Besides, I don't need you for this. I can easily do this myself. I was never doubting that you (or about anyone else) could reduce polygon counts on a model, do UV maps or any of that. I was only contending with your concept of being able to significantly reduce a mesh and not have to touch the UV map at all. There is always an in-between step from the original to the reduced model. It could be doing it by hand (i.e. a new UV map or tweaking the original) or using something like XSI's Gater to transfer the UV map.

No, go play nice somewhere. I don't intend to (play nice, that is ).

Professional 2D, 3D and Real-Time 3D Content Creation:
HyperGraph Studios