1024 x 152 and a 1024 x 1024 texture can it cause issues by axis and scruntch tetxu

is there a difference between high resolution and textures that are I guess called 1x1 in size like 2048 x 2048 canvas size compared to 2048 x 152 image? I’m wondering if this could cause the image to scrunch up because of what axis is longer or shorter for the UV and the texture.

I am using high resolution textures. if I download or get a image offline it seems when I get one wood image say as furniture so it doesn’t have any seams , it looks great. but with planks, even if the resolution is good it looks bad. This plank is a 1024 x 1024 and look how bad it looks in the view port but the uv editor it looks clear. Blender wont let me upload the file so I added these 3 pics. anybody have this issue or know how to fix this? I did pack my islands to get maximum scale for the images.

should I adjust the resolution in Photoshop and maybe canvas size to help with the UV not scrunching up? I did pack my islands to measure both images in this file.

this may be more clear since I cant load the blender file for some reason.

so why unclear when I crop plank textures?

I’, just wondering why my textures either seem to small and unclear when a crop a plank texture and it still has a resolution over 1k and it still looks smeared, also it seems the texture is scaled right right up, not sure if this is called projection image and if there is a certain way to do this, packing islands seems to zoom in to the texture i think.

http://www.pasteall.org/blend/32057

While the texture is about 1k, your UVmap only uses less than 40% of it, which is the same to use a texture with a width of 400px (or less)

I have been looking up tutorials and I cant find a tutorial on fixing this besides moving my vertices manually, but doesn’t that stretch anyway, so isn’t there a uv adjustment button I am missing? I have tried scaled Islands that didn’t do anything and if i pack Islands it seems to rotate my uv 90 degrees and put it into a corner. I did use ctrl a and used rotate and scale for the mesh so it was scaled correctly. I found this info in the manual and it does say to use images of power to 1 and power of 2 and so on. so I wonder if that is what keeps the image from not being scrunched up for the projection? I did see click on the snap to pixels and constrain image boarders and it seems to help with scaling the uv bu tit still doesn’t cover the whole mesh but its better. I also applied an image power of 1 (1024 x 1024)
manual info is the second pic

thank you for your reply

I don’t clearly understand the problem, so forgive me if i say something not needed :wink:

In the .blend you provided there is the plank: in edit mode, press u, unwrap. The uv will be well scaled (x,y) since the object is simple, image is square and you marked seams ok.
Problem is that the plank is “covering” only around 30% of the 1024x1024 texture, for this you see a blurry plank in the viewport, as Secrop said.
To improve this (more definition) you can simply scale the uv layout (remember to disable “costrain to image bounds”) a couple of times: this will introduce more visible seams in the plank texture, so you have to check how to create seamless textures.

When you use not square textures (as you said 2048x152) i would suggest to disable the “correct aspect” checkbox in the tools panel that will appear when you press “unwrap”, so uv layout will be correctly scaled without stretching.

thank you, I started looking at the manual again. and when I watched Jonathan Williamson tutorial on hard-surface. I did learn about the scaling in edit mode to keep the location and scale to 0. I was doing off and on and also, I need to learn more about the scale island, pack islands , image to boarders and pixel restraint, maybe my answers may be in there too.

I was also wondering if the texture not being 1024 x 1024 compared to a 1024 x 152, wouldn’t that cause an issue as well because of the axis and the image being smaller on one axis? The manual did say it’s better to texture with a power to one image texture but not why, but I do plan to learn more of what the pixel restraint, constrain image bounds does to understand more about texture.

thanks for your time in answering my question

From what i know you can use any size and ratio you want (unless limited by your video card/ram); you use textures power of 2 becouse they are the more memory efficient.
The only “issue” is that you need to scale well (proportionally x/y) the uv layout, otherwise the texture showed on the object will be stretched/blurred,etc.

The ‘power of two’ rule is more for GPU rendering and for game engines that use graphic cards-ram. It’s not a needed, but is a way to do it better.

The only problem I can see here, is some flaws in the UVmapping and the textures. These are quite common, and there’s no way to solve them in a simple way. A good uvmap depends on a good texture, and vice versa. When this doesn’t happen, then the solutions will strongly depent of futher information. There’s not a better global workaround. The solution is allways to make a UVmap that fits your object and a texture that fits your uvmap.

Faster alternatives can be found, but each with an Achilles’ heel.