Damn you Bloughsburgh, you beat me to it! ;)

NewHouse, I saw your new pics. Did you desaturate your blue lights? They seem to have lost much of their hue. 

Part of yes.. and no, since I'm still working on lights. I kind of came back to original ones, because blue wasn't that much as present. Too much white and it kind of lost the whole mood totally. 

Yeah, I loved the intense dark blue of your MJ7 version.

Yellow Death: Hey, if it isn't good ol' hskl07_1! I've just used the exact same texture for some stairs I made. Is that a new map? There is a very yellow lava texture in AD_lavatomb, maybe it will do? 

Also, when you're in need of textures, make sure you visit this page: https://www.quaddicted.com/files/wads/
It has a whole bunch of .wad files used by mappers available for download. 

Thanks buddy, this is just the concept. I really have to finish up first my IceCore map.

It feels so great to know.. actually when it is finished - I don't want to sound rude or anything, but it is sure couple people will start posting comments like "buhuu it is so dark, I can't handle this darkness" yet "it is so hard, I can't handle this madness".. it really makes me wonder why brightness settings aren't implemented yet for quake (modern standards). It is impossible to make everything work for every person screen settings, when dealing with colors a lot, and that is fact.

About difficulty.. if you remember playing doom maps, difficulty was often just pure evil (almost even impossible), and my map wasn't even in those levels. Just couple projectiles to be able to dodge, shoot precisely not wasting cells etc. basic stuff. And some people starts almost demanding/expecting that hard difficulty it shouldn't be that hard.. what do you expect sincerely? Next difficulty after hard is nightmare already yet we don't live anymore in 1996 when even couple shamblers was too much to handle. I personally appreciate hardcore players, which love even unfair situations and ammo limitations. Normal mode will always be just enough, it will be a bit harder than normal mode in original episodes.

But even though if I appreciate many opinions, and try my best to make it appeal as many people as possible, it is unavoidable that surely some people will dislike it no matter what you do. That's why I want to do what just feels right to me in the end. 

Amen to that. You first get into mapping because you want it, not because the others want you to. It's good to take advice from the community but when you aim to please everyone, you expose yourself to losing your identity. I love it when mappers have their own style and personality. A Sock map doesn't look and feel like a Necros map and that's how it should be. Hell, even the original id mappers had their own styles! If your style is intense colors, so be it! We don't see this kind of stuff much since Unreal and I enjoy it. People say it's not realistic but since when Quake is supposed to be realistic? It's one of the most surreal FPS I've ever played.

And if people really find your map too dark, they can easily adjust it with QuakeSpasm's new contrast setting. I've used these settings:
contrast "1.5"
gamma "0.85"
and it was perfectly fine. I still need to play it in Darkplaces though. 

I haven't tried it on darkplaces either, even though I had downloaded it long time ago.. it has that a bit shiny-look, if you know what I mean. Also I need to consider writing down on readme something about those console commands. 

I think Quake's light map is gray scale 0-255 if no lit file is used, and I don't think screen shots are affected by the gamma setting. If so, you can probably tell how well a map is lit by looking at the RGB values in a photo editor for screen shots taken with r_lightmap 1 

And if people really find your map too dark, they can easily adjust it with QuakeSpasm's new contrast setting.

Literally the opposite of "good advice for lighting". 

Literally the opposite of "good advice for lighting".

"Nothing wrong with my map, must be the player's fault" seems to be a running theme in the Cumdump and PooHouse show lmao :D 

 

Rick: I have been doing that, but it is not that easy in practice.

onetrupurple: Not the best advice & I highly try to avoid it, but in the end "some" people might need to use them.

ayy lmao: you aren't spammed already? 

Srsly tho. Look at Quake. Make your maps a comparable overall brightness to that. Then it will work for almost everyone. It's not complicated. 

Okay? Then what do you think about these pics I sent earlier (I haven't received much feedback about new lighting attempts):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwxYkKdSD855V0RmZHBFNENRRms/view?usp=sharing 

Instead of acting like complete jerks, why don't you guys be constructive for once and share your own brightness settings? 

That's a lot of effort to work on light levels so kudos to you on that.

I would say something in between the two examples you are showing in that grid picture. I definitely think some of the images on the right are much too bright and detracts from the atmosphere you are so purposefully trying to achieve. On the other hand, some of the darker images on the left do not display any detail at all and I find that to be simply too dark.

I know that cold is a theme so if some dark areas are absolutely vital to your design then keep them, but the fact you are taking these steps to fine tune light is a good sign! 

Picking a suitable lighting level for a quake map is not some incredibly obscure alchemy, comprehensible to only the most wizened mappers - it is literally - like Shambler says - a case of comparing your maps with other known good maps like the original id maps and just making sure you're not far off that.

You won't get any useful information from knowing what gamma settings people play on - you may as well be asking them how their monitor is set up, and what the brightness of the room they are playing in is. 

This might be too much to ask.. but could you or some people actually mark pics which are too dark by "x" and some what are too bright by "y". And in the end I could actually analyze results. I could use this for my future maps too, to check good brightness for every color. After all, I can't adjust my screen's brightness level any lower, and it is still bright and colors are showing well, I should do something else to my screen to make it work like every cheap acer laptop screen.

This is maybe too much to ask, but I have been playing with values you guys (Rick/ericw) has sent to me. And also listening you Bloughsburgh how to use wait etc. Maybe I haven't found the right combination yet. 

Don't use my maps as reference though. I'm bad at light. 

The new lighting looks fine. I don't think there are any pics that look too dark. Some of them may actually have a bit too much light (mostly the L shaped corridors) - maybe use a different delay setting.

MugWump, if a map is too dark with gamma 1, then it's not lit properly. 

Should I use gamme 0.9 or gamma 1.0 while compiling? Or should I rise up it even, when using colors as main light source? 

they look good newhouse, you've put a tonne of extra work in since the jam, that is pretty obvious. the results look like they're paying off. 

Use "gamma 1" in game. 

Honestly, looking back at the grid I think the very bottom dark pictures are perhaps a tad too dark. Those are probably the only ones.

As OTP said, I think a lot of the pictures are a bit too bright (Especially the far right examples)

Admittedly I only ever played your very first offering of the map so I don't have much reference to go on. I'll have to try your newer version at some point! ;) 

You know I'm a bit slow when it comes to learning basics.. I'm more visual person, I almost need people to go hand in hand showing me how things should be done.

L shaped lambs on top indeed are so bright that even my eyes are now burning. I have to decrease intensity a bit* I was only thing on make focus much more clear - but then there is also part "not too clear". It should be a bit more tender touch there.

Inside joke "I have a headache".