Finding over large textures, and total texture size in model?

I am helping make a huge model more manageable. It’s included large numbers of over-detailed 3D warehouse components.

Tried Generate Report to see if I could work out which components are biggest resource hogs . Nothing has happened after 15 minutes except a blank opened window where you would (if it showed anything) specify what you want to report.

I’m going to try the Goldilocks plugin but if I understand it right, it works only on what is visible.

Is there any other way of finding out what the total contribution to the file size is from textures? There are over 1500 materials in the model.

I’m working on drastically reducing the edge and face count, by simplifying repeated components - with success, but it is slow work. I just wonder how else to get the model to be more responsive.

The author (Scott Baker, @NewThinking2) already knows to turn off layers with unneeded detail while modelling, to use monochrome, and will probably have to temporarily remove (for later reinstatement) complex entourage.

Any other tips, other than the Irish version of how to get from A to B: “I wouldn’t start from here!”?

John, I sent you a PM with a method I use to test. Let me know if it proves useful.

I believe you are correct that Goldilocks evaluates based on the ratio of texture image pixels to as-viewed screen pixels. The goal is to find textures that contain finer details than can be seen. As you zoom out, this ratio becomes larger because the entity is still painted with the same part of the texture image but occupies a smaller part of the screen. But the need to examine the screen pixel size of every entity is why the analysis takes so long.

you may want to consider rendering your replacement textures as opposed to a straight export…

this was just a quick Visualizer from v16…


Actually, Steve, Goldilocks was pretty quick! Even with about 1/3 of the model visible, it took less than a minute to list the textures most over detailed in the view. Pity that Goldilocks neither highlights the relevant faces, nor tell you what component(s) contain that material. Will take some detective work to track them down.

Will try your script when I get home later this afternoon .

With over 1500 materials in the model, even finding the material to edit its size down is going to be hard on a Mac - I don’t think there’s an alphabetical list view, is there?

Perhaps save them to a collection? I don’t often use materials, except very simply with named colours, or a few wood textures, so have v limited experience of managing them

That sounds potentially useful. I might try it in an older version of SU - I think I made a trial install of Visualizer, (or maybe it was KerkyThea?) but haven’t used it.

Have not tried this for some time but, if you can find the skm file then using just the explorer will report the size of each size at the .skm extension level. That would usually allowed me to find the main contributors so at least you do not have to sort all the material files. Then one has to " unzip" the skm file to get to the actual file and see if size can be reduced.
Just some thoughts from " old" user.

Thanks, @mac7595, I’ll try that

For PC you can set explorer for various display options , think one is size. The most of the skm files are in the low kb range I would find maybe less than 10 where the size got out of hand but I have no sense what they run now.
Do not recall models with 1500:dizzy_face:

Aside, the question always in my mind what is causing problem? At that time with copy of model and using one of Tigs plugin you can delete all , say materials, and get a sense are they the problem or some thing else?

Goldilocks shows you why file size is not the discerning factor when it comes to texels

both images are the same size, but the pixel density per square inch is a little low on the ‘billboard’ and over 8 times what it needs to be on the ‘postage stamp’ for this view

if I zoom in on the stamp it will eventually be right and zooming out on the billboard would also come good…

scaling textured faces has an unexpected outcomes…


Alas, not on Mac (this was the subject of another post recently). The snippet I sent you reports based on material name and also reports the file the texture image comes from, which may help you track down the culprits.

That sounds useful. Most will have come from downloaded component files - though, I’ve just realised, Scot downloaded most straight into his main model, so it just may report that as the source.

We definitely shouldn’t have started from here!

This topic was automatically closed after 91 days. New replies are no longer allowed.