I often repaint liveries for PSS payware aircraft and have been disappointed with the textures rendered in FS9. It was clear that DXTBmp just wasn't giving me the quality that I wanted. This escalated when I did a silver Jetstar A320 and the grey-silver gradients washed out. (Sure hope the silver trend among new liveries passes fast.) Getting desperate, I perused this forum, then Martin's MWGraphics forum where I got a clue.I was using DXTBmp to save into DXT3 24-bit with an alpha, which is fine for AI aircraft repaints but not for the aircraft you fly. When I saved into Extended 32 bit 888-8 format, my aircraft in FS9 looked much, much more like it did in PSP. File sizes say much about the quality - and the effect on frame rates. 24-bit DXT3 files are 1,025 KB while 32-bit files are 4,097. The PSS texture files, by the way, are also 4,097.And I suggest a compromise with texture file sizes and frame rates. The PSS aircraft have 4 or 6 files. 3 or 4 of them are the wings and lights. Why not use DXT3 for these where quality matters little and 32 bit only for the day fuselage textures? Works for me.If I don't have this right, which is very possible, please get me back on the [email protected]

Well,I hope I don't annoy too many model enthusiasts here -- but I have to say that I immediately convert any 32 bit textures into DXT3 textures for any a/c that I download (either freeware or payware). I do this because, for me, Simming is a combination of many things, There is no one particualar aspect that I prefer over any others. So, overall an aircraft has to have "balance" There is no point in having a beautiful exterior model if, when flying in the VC, and swapping to an external view, texture loading time is too long. Personally, I can't see any difference between 32 bit or DXT3 textures -- but maybe that is because I am too busy flying the a/c -- don't know.Barry

"Well,I hope I don't annoy too many model enthusiasts here "Barry, you certainly won't annoy me with what you have said ;)32-bit textures are a WASTE to those that fly the planes, maybe the "exterior junkies" see the 0.1% quality improvement, but we don't.Let me just list the pro's and con's for you, you can make your own mind up.DXT3Pro's4 times smaller in filesize, saves HDD space, saves download time, and hosting sites bandwidth.A big increase in texture loading in sim, increased FPS.Con'sMaybe a VERY slight degredation in quality, BUT, if you add 1 "sharpen" filter to a texture before DXT3 conversion it makes the degredation even less.32-BIT.Pro'sEven so slight increase in quality.Con's4 times bigger than DXT3Increased load on FS, causing slow loading of textures, and slower performace all round.In reality there is no need to make textures 32-bit, its a waste.Dan.

Dan hit the nail on the head here. The only degradation I see when using DXT3 vice 32 bit is in very fine lines surounded by color, like window frames. When you zoom in really close (like when your painting) after saving as DXT3 you will see a very slight bleed into the other colors. Other than that some very imperceptable detail loss in fine lines and curves. Most folks cant tell in screenshots. Textures load much faster and things will run ever so slightly smoother in the sim. I guess having a fuselage and tail in 32 bit is reasonable but I still like DXT3 and I have a pretty fast system here too.Hornit

Have done my paints/textures always in 32 bit however lately I'm tending more to DXT3 :-)This for performance reasons only...Andr

I have to agree with this. I convert most 32 bit textures to dxt3 and always get a pretty significant performance improvement with little if any loss of visual quality. Generally speaking, I also remove the mips from the skins and (with rare exceptions) I find this does more to improve the exterior appearance than using the 32bit textures anyway. Afiac the hit to performance far outweighs the miniscule visual benefit of 32 bit.