OTOY Forums

Hi. I'm trying to understand the problem of texture size in Octan. I have a scene where a model is 141MB and texture 366MB:
- texture 1 (jpg_6000x8000, file size 7,49MB)
- texture 2 (jpg_6000x8000, file size 7,49MB)
- texture 3 (jpg_6000x8000, file size 11,2MB)
- texture 4 (jpg_6000x8000, file size 11,2MB)
totality=37,38MB

So why Octan takes 366MB?
How to work with textures - is there a topic devoted to this issue?

jpg is compressed. The amount of megabytes on disk is not equal the actual amount that the image takes when loaded into ram. RGB = 3 bytes / pixel

Thanks Matej! You really helped me to calculate the scene. I scaled textures to 1200x800 and they take only 12MB without loss of quality.

nice tip...thx

Guys when you are calculating megabytes, remember that 1 Mb = 1024 kb = 1024^2 b
So the formula would be:

(width x height x 3) / (1024^2) = number of Mb in memory

So your textures take "less"; ~11 Mb

If the image has alpha channel, that's another byte / pixel

silly question (1024^2) is (1024*1024)?
btw, Octane prefer texture with power of 2 size or it can deal (optimise) with other size?

gzavye wrote:silly question (1024^2) is (1024*1024)?

Yes

gzavye wrote:btw, Octane prefer texture with power of 2 size or it can deal (optimise) with other size?

Good question. Hopefully someone form the dev team will answer that.

gzavye wrote:"btw, Octane prefer texture with power of 2 size or it can deal (optimise) with other size?

What do you mean by that. Can you give an example?

Historically, video cards prefer pwr of 2 size for textures : 512*512, 1024*1024, 256*512...
I know that modern softwares are able to dynamically resize nSize texture, but in this case rendering may be less efficient.
So what type Octane prefers?

Does anybody know the answer to this? What texture size/side relation is best in Octane? Power of 2 square (i.e. 512*512 etc...) ? Or does it not matter?