How did you import them into TexMex without saving them to disk? (Like why would you have to re-make them)

If your life easier you convert to the Quake palette (preferably without fullbrights) in the image editor, then CTRL-C and copy the image ... and then ALT-TAB to TexMex and press CTRL-SHIFT-V to paste the image into the wad. 

You need to be sending it 8 bit textures with the correct 256 color palette.
That's good to know. PhotoShop does work with a palette. I'll have to check if it accepts the .lmp format, probably yes.

How did you import them into TexMex without saving them to disk?
I didn't say I didn't save them! CTRL-C + CTRL-SHIFT-V is exactly what I did, I just seem to have skipped the palette conversion part...

I've noticed something else: the mipmaps generated from the full-size image, either in TexMex or Wally, include greys in them while the original textures only have 2 colors: black and white. In-game, this results in a change of tone in the distance, visible in the screenshot I posted earlier. Is there a way to prevent the mipmap generator from blending black and white into greys? If not, can I edit the mipmaps in PS or replace the generated ones with my own? 

I've mostly used bitmap for Quake when actually saving files for future use, but always as 8 bit with palette. This works perfectly for me. Seems like I read somewhere the format actually used by ID for Quake was pcx.

I never needed to mess with the mipmaps, but I seem to remember something called MipDip? Maybe look at Quaddicted or Quaketastic. 

Is the best for texture editing imo. It lets you do cool noise effects and remip too. 

I never needed to mess with the mipmaps
I probably wouldn't need to with regular, colored textures (or even greyscaled like map jam 8), but I'm doing something really special with only pure black and pure white. Greys would mess that up. I'll look into MipDip, thanks. 

I have Wally but haven't used it for many years. I have no idea why. It looks like it can do some useful things that my ancient copy of PSP 4 can't. I don't see any way to directly edit the sub mips though. 

hi i want to know how to make maps with trenchbroom there is no tutorial on how to compile maps. how do i compile maps? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZ5NUiYtvC8

i watched this video but there are no tutorials how to actually compile maps 

my map compiler says this:
${WORK_DIR_PATH}/${MAP_BASE_NAME}-compile.map


output says this:
#### Exporting map file '/Users/Leo/Desktop/unnamed-compile.map'

and then i get a .map file on my deskotop
but i need it to be .bsp to be able to play it. 

what now? 

ive downloeaded 4 different mapeditors for quake and non of them are very user friendly and the resources on the interent are limited on this subject. 

https://quakewiki.org/wiki/Getting_Started_Mapping 

Trenchbroom comes with documentation on how to compile. 

http://www.celephais.net/board/view_thread.php?id=61211&start=574

View this thread for the most recent compiling tools.

These are the files youll need to add to the compile screen on Trenchbroom, below:

http://imgur.com/a/xI7zu

Above is the same screen used in the Help section thats included with Trenchbroom.

Please, read all the included documentation with these files and Trenchbroom. 

If you have any understanding of folders, files, file extensions, and how to use Windows Explorer, then just use a batch file. Way easier in my opinion than all that gobbledygook in the wiki. 

im a mac user and i use trenchbroom 

I'm sure there's Mac equivalents. It's basic computer stuff. The compiler programs are all command line types. You just type in the instruction and hit enter.

A batch file is just plain text, a kind of script, that runs the commands in sequence automatically. On Windows, it's easier if the map file and all the compiler programs are in the same folder. Also, the full path to the texture wad needs to be in the map file so bsp.exe can include the textures in the final .bsp file.

Sorry I don't know enough about Macs to help more. Maybe on a Mac it's easier to just get the editor to do everything. 

I'm sure there's Mac equivalents.

Muahahahaha.

No batch files. No ability to do command line parameters. No true ability to create a shortcut to an application and what you can do in no ways is a Windows equivalent.

On a tech site, some nerdy guy with Cheetos fingers would say "bash script" is like "batch files" ... except yeah, for a casual user those are nothing alike.

(Average Joe can make/edit/run a batch file because it was designed for the average guy to be able to do it. Average Joe needs 1 yr of education to make "bash script" because he is not intended knowledge-level a bash script has in mind.) 

Really? I had no idea. The only time I ever used an Apple was in my college computer lab back in the 80s 

Beagle Bros 4 Ever!!! 

No batch files. No ability to do command line parameters. No true ability to create a shortcut to an application
Yet another slew of good reasons not to use Macs...

So, I've searched Quaddicted, Quaketastic and Google for MipDip, but no luck so far. Does anyone have a copy of it by any chance? 

But did you try Quake Terminus? :O

http://www.quaketerminus.com/tools.shtml 

Thanks, Bloughsburgh. As a matter of fact, no, I didn't. I remember visiting this site once for other purposes but it didn't occur to me this time. Bookmarked. 

While I'd normally ignore a comment as derisive as yours (there is no need to bring down Frito-Lay's fine products), I am concerned about the misinformation you are spreading.

First of all, you claim there is "No ability to do command line parameters," yet in the same post you mention bash scripts. Bash is an interactive shell, it's how users interact with software, and it certainly provides users the means of supplying arguments. Now, where Mac falls on its face is with "apps" that require a special command in order to provide arguments to the program, but that's not an issue with compile tools because they're command-line utilities.

Second, writing shell scripts is no more difficult than writing batch files. Granted, the bourne shell and the bourne-again shell after it contain a dizzying number of features, but some things are actually easier to do in sh/bash than in a batch file. For example, "for loops" in cmd.exe are fairly useless if delayed variable expansion is not enabled, and it's not enabled by default; that has to be set before-hand as an extra step. But I'm getting ahead of myself; in its simplest form a shell script executes commands in sequence, just like a batch file. Both provide more features than just that, but their presence does not make writing scripts in either more difficult. The point is, you don't need to know all of bash's features just to write a script. The only way a shell script is more difficult is that its necessary to change permissions on the file to be marked as executable (chmod +x <script>).

Third, your description of "Average Joe" is oddly specific. "Average Joe" can use the command line, and "Average Joe" can write batch files, but when we start talking about bash scripts, now we're reaching outside Joe's capabilities. I'm pretty sure if Joe can do something with batch files, Joe knows what he needs to search for on google to find out how to do it in a bash script. It certainly won't take a year for Joe to do what he wants to do, and this is basically how I learned to do shell scripting. If I needed to know how to do something, I looked it up, and if I used any particular feature frequently enough it became stuck in my head.

Now, if you can provide me a batch file, I can try and show you a shell script that does the same thing (granted a difference in directory structure) that is no more difficult to write or understand. If I can't, I'll admit I'm wrong.

Gee, I really spent too much time on this post, I think I've gone full-Cheeto. 

Forgot to add @baker in the title of my last post. Also, I'm really sorry I strayed so far off-topic on this. I hope I didn't start a flame war in an on-topic board.