RE: NEW Binary Alchemy Shader collection v14

["Schoenberger" <XSI(at)digidragon.de>]

 

You can have multiple objects with different materials. The color switcher shader itself handles matte/transparency.

But the shader does not handle reflections or IOR for transparency.

This is the only limitation if you use different shaders for different channels.

 

Holger Schönberger
technical director
The day has 24 hours, if that does not suffice, I will take the night

 

---

From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Nick
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 3:31 AM
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Re: NEW Binary Alchemy Shader collection v14

It's also very useful for heavy displacement and hair as you no longer have to wait for XSI to generate that data for each pass, it only pre-processes all that once... it's one of the major advantages of having many AOVs coming out of the one render with renderman compliant renderers, the geometry processing only happens once (even if you are baking the geo and injecting it at rendertime, you only have the overhead of loading that data off disk once)

I haven't looked at it yet Holger but how does it deal with sorting what outputs to inject into the final image? Can I have different shaders on multiple objects write to the same file? Lets say I want to mix the specs of all my objects in one pass, but I want seperate diffuse passes for each one, is it simply a matter of pointing the outputs to the same file if I want many objects to contribute to that pass and point the outputs to their own unique file if I want only those objects to be considered in that pass? Is there any way of choosing whether or not other objects matte out a certain pass (if other objects which shaders are not writing to that file are considered) like we're doing here with 3Delight?

why the 7 output limitation?

cheers!

"Curious" nick.

On 5/12/06, Schoenberger < XSI(at)digidragon.de> wrote:

Oh I forgot one case for the pass channel use!

If you have a slow complex fractal shader network and you use it for multiple passes,
then it could be better to use it in pass channels.
Cause every result of a render tree node is cached.
If you use the fractal multiple times,
the new channel does not have to re-calculate the fractals.


Holger Schönberger
technical director
The day has 24 hours, if that does not suffice, I will take the night



  |> -----Original Message-----
  |> From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM
  |> [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Schoenberger
  |> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 12:55 PM
  |> To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
  |> Subject: RE: NEW Binary Alchemy Shader collection v14
  |>
  |>
  |>   |> So just to clarify, this shader does not remove the
  |>   |> necessity to use passes (seeing as the shader only renders
  |>   |> selects one channel at a time), but increases flexibility
  |>   |> as far as setting up the passes.
  |>   |> Is that right?
  |>
  |>
  |> You can use both.
  |>
  |> The main reason for the shader is a simple setup of
  |> multiple passes in one render tree.
  |> Most of the time you are right.
  |>
  |> But if you have a scene that takes a long time for render
  |> pre-processing or ray intersection testing,
  |> You can render up to 7 different materials into your
  |> available pass channels.
  |> E.g. I have a scene which takes 3 minutes per frame before
  |> it starts rendering.
  |> I will definately render all layers in the channels of one
  |> single pass.
  |>
  |>
  |> Holger Schönberger
  |> technical director
  |> The day has 24 hours, if that does not suffice, I will
  |> take the night
  |>
  |>
  |>
  |>
  |> ---
  |> Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the
  |> following text in body:
  |> unsubscribe xsi
  |>


---
Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in body:
unsubscribe xsi