"Fake" lightmaps VS. "Real"

[jngrow]

Ok, This has really been bothering me. Whenever I run lightmaps on a level, the overall level looks better, with more ambiance. But, for example when I go and change some of the bsp, and recompile without redoing the lightmaps, it seems to be better in its own way. Bump maps are MUCH more dramatic , pronounced, and the map generally looks like it has better graphics, but with worse art direction (I know that sounds odd).
http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/1226/fakelightingvsrealhg0.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Is there any way to get the best of both worlds?

[Roostervier]

When you recompile, the lightmaps are basically the same as they would be if you ran them on checkerboard. This is normal.

[edit] Also, the rerendered set is much sexier. I dislike the one to the left. It looks ugly, I don't care how much more the bump map is pronounced.

[jngrow]

Hmm, I guess it is just me, asked a few other people and they disliked the one on the left also.

[FireScythe]

What lightmap level are you running at on the right? Bumpmaps will not be evident unless you run it at low or above. Draft_whatever has no bumpmaps.

Also, the reason the bumps are there on the left is because if no lightmaps are present, tool will use the default lightmaps as a placeholder, which does utilise bumpmaps.

[et_cg]

Make sure all your shaders that are being referenced in the level have their lightmap value set to 0. You might get better results to the "fake" lightmap you are referring to.

In order for me to achieve certain characteristics to stand out in certain parts of the map, I just make sure all the shaders have a lightmap value of zero and then place some sort of external light there, something that emits, but is invisible.

The effect you are getting is the engine's failure to match up all the data from the lightmap to the bsp. I do believe keeping a level Halo oriented would require lightmapping. But to go for the fakey fakey, with no idea of how it will turn out, just slap some other lightmap on it, and it will look gourgeous. (Sidewinder's first iteration was extremely bright, but it was beautiful, imo)

[jngrow]

Hmm, ok. Do shaders' lightmap values default to 0? Oh, and about lights, is there a way to make my own light tags? Because the default ones are weird, and hard to notice/use.

[Stealth]

Ok, This has really been bothering me. Whenever I run lightmaps on a level, the overall level looks better, with more ambiance. But, for example when I go and change some of the bsp, and recompile without redoing the lightmaps, it seems to be better in its own way. Bump maps are MUCH more dramatic , pronounced, and the map generally looks like it has better graphics, but with worse art direction (I know that sounds odd).
http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/1226/fakelightingvsrealhg0.jpg

Is there any way to get the best of both worlds?
hey dude, just so you know, there is this cool think called wshot tags, I think you need to check them out.

[DaneO'Roo]

Left looks alot better..

[Stealth]

agreed, it looks abit more real looking then the right.

[Flyboy]

Ditto.

[jngrow]

OK THEN! I guess I'm not crazy XD.

[Tweek]

i agree, left is better.
far more natural lighting, especially on the chief.

[fletcher77]

What level did you compile your light at? I had the same problem with my map blast castle. I rendered it on medium and the bump mapping was not evident. I never did run it on super, so I don't know if it would have fixed it.

[jngrow]

at low, for the uglier one. then at "none" for the better one (low, change geometry, recompile w/o light).

[Chewy Gumball]

i agree, left is better.
far more natural lighting, especially on the chief.

If by natural you mean light coming out of the ground? The chief looks better but thats about it. Unless you have some big light source coming from below those cliffs there is no way that light is anywhere close to natural.

[jngrow]

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/5374/fakvrl2fo6.th.jpg (http://img255.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fakvrl2fo6.jpg)
http://img206.imageshack.us/img206/2969/fakvrl3ac3.th.jpg (http://img206.imageshack.us/my.php?image=fakvrl3ac3.jpg)

Ok, First one is "Real" second is "Fake". No lightshaders is a -1, but the awesome-ness of the bump maps (LOOK AT THAT SMG) is something to consider. The lighting in the fake is very unrealistic, like Chewy said, but I think it looks better. The Real has more ambiance, and is much more realistic, but you loose that MASSIVE level of detail.

[Tweek]

If by natural you mean light coming out of the ground? The chief looks better but thats about it. Unless you have some big light source coming from below those cliffs there is no way that light is anywhere close to natural.

are you KIDDING ME?

on the left, there actually IS light.
the right looks like hes just in some kind of purple haze-ish envirioment, and all the rock has been sanded down. i for one would prefer to play in an enviroment where rook actually looks like rock ALL THE TIME, and not only when some dynamic lightsource happens to come near it.

[Chewy Gumball]

The lighting on the right is far more believable than the lighting on the left. The left is not natural at all. It doesn't matter anyway cause he shouldn't be done lighting his level.

[Reaper Man]

Augh, do it in Mental Ray.