Re: Replacing the shadertree? Possible?

["Robert Moodie" <robertm(at)hybride.com>]

I've been thinking this conversation was on some kind of infinite loop for a 
long time.
I still don't know what the point is (and I'm NOT looking for 
clarification).





----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Luc Froelicher" <lulu(at)alamaison.fr>
To: <XSI(at)Softimage.COM>
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: Replacing the shadertree? Possible?


isn't this thing starting to look like a collective hallucination ? ....
or I'm missing something

robert(at)texturelighting.com a Ãcrit :
> Fantastic!
> This brings XSI closer to Houdini's VEX shader building block, something 
> that will help keep
> XSI closer to the forefront of high-end 3D work... much better maths 
> involved and flexible..
> Thanks for your contribution!
> Now, if someone could do the same for procedurals...!
> -Robert
>
> Thomas Helzle wrote:
> > The solution is in reach:
> > If anyone missed this amazing new material
> > http://www.tek2shoot.com/content/view/29/27/
> > Please have a look.
> > It combines a lot of what we are talking about here into one shader.
> >
> > - Instead of separate shaders for each highlight-flavor you have a 
> > dropdown to select the one you need.
> > - Instead of those cheap archaic highlight solutions (phong, blinn) only, 
> > it has Lafortune built in that really looks like light reflections 
> > instead of painting just dots.
> > - It combines physical accurate surface simulation with all the older 
> > models.
> >
> > For me, it will replace about 20 or more of XSIs nodes in my everyday 
> > work.
> >
> > And it is very fast too.
> >
> > It reflects perfectly what I need everyday: On one hand, I need "Steel, 
> > Gold, Glass, Paint" - I don't want to spend half an hour with basic 
> > archaic nodes to get it right, but just slap a shader on it and be done. 
> > There are many materials like these that are very well defined anyway.
> > Then I have more special needs where I need to tweak a lot. Again, with 
> > this node I see all the possibilities to mix and connect like I want to.
> >
> > My first test after playing with the shader for 20 minutes:
> > www.screendream.de/stuff/T2S_illumination_Glass_v0001.jpg
> >
> > Wow, this tool is hot.
> >
> > Now I just have to find out how I can make this the default material :-)
> >
> > I am deeply impressed by this shader. Thanks a ton for this fantastic 
> > plugin to the people at Tek2Shot!
> >
> > Thanks, Thanks, Thanks, Thanks....
> > ... ok I'll stop now ;-)
> >
> > Thomas Helzle
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 22:36:47 +0200, Andy Jones <andy(at)thefront.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > It sounds like what you're talking about is a sort of "shader wizard"
> > > that just helps you design a shader.  This is something we've talked
> > > about for quite a while, as a way to get more people shading despite the
> > > additional complexity of our custom multi-pass shader trees that tend to
> > > change per job.  In lieu of actually doing that, we eventually just
> > > implemented a system for translating standard shaders into valid shader
> > > for the current job by creating a library of metadata about how all the
> > > inputs of shaders should be interpreted, even if they have different
> > > names.  The problem is that artists still do weird things with the base
> > > shaders that don't really translate into something reasonable and
> > > organized.  And sometimes we get things dialed by eye that are just
> > > downright wrong.
> > >
> > > Ultimately, what has benefited us far more is to find ways to reduce the
> > > building blocks of the shaders to a smaller set which we can then change
> > > dynamically and have the changes propagate through the job.  By doing
> > > this, we reduced the amount of work required to do shading for a job and
> > > were able to leverage more talent and technical prowess per shader than
> > > we could before.  Basically, what I'm saying is that there would be
> > > tremendous benefit on even just medium scale productions to having some
> > > sort of macro engine so that the work done by technical types could be
> > > used in an intuitive way by artists within the context of a particular
> > > show.  Sort of like if there were an easy interface for creating shader
> > > phenomena (which maybe there will be very soon).
> > >
> > > Wizard-like tools would still be very useful for people I'm sure.  These
> > > aren't mutually exclusive concepts at all.
> > >
> > > -Andy
> > >
> > > Luc-Eric Rousseau wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I did not argue for a layer-based approach instead of a tree-based 
> > > > approach, I argued for new tools where the material is described by 
> > > > combining elemental, artistic properties together instead of 
> > > > programming functions.  Some of these functions may be complex and a 
> > > > single conceptual connection between two could mean dozens of 
> > > > connections at the low implementation level.  For fudging the results, 
> > > > artist might use tools like paint the shadows and highlights in 3D, or 
> > > > position a gradient with a manipulator in the 3D viewport. It just 
> > > > means that the problems are addressed in different ways, not so much 
> > > > based on how it has to be implemented.   The tech people always get a 
> > > > sense of panic that power will be taken from them any time these 
> > > > discussions occur, but they generally end up benifiting from 
> > > > additionnal tools to play with, and more time to as the mundane stuff 
> > > > begins to work out-of-the-box.  btw I don't know the plans in XSI, but 
> > > > it should be interesting to see how mental r!
> >  ay!
> >
> > >  '!
> > >
> > > > s metaSL will impact the more technical needs.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Tim Leydecker
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Luc,
> > > > >
> > > > > itÂs true, everything that can be laid out flat and painted easily
> > > > > across meshborders without any seams is an artists dream.
> > > > >
> > > > > But nodes for condition state of an object/selection are as well,
> > > > > the angle two objects have, the distance in a relation to something
> > > > > else, the lightintensity at a certain point, the viewingangle
> > > > > all those
> > > > > bits also help in getting the best out of that perfect pink nailgloss
> > > > > painted on previously. ItÂs also great if you donÂt have to repeatedly
> > > > > refresh it whenever you add a layer, e.g. you share a common
> > > > > texture support or UV set, picked one, new color done.
> > > > >
> > > > > IÂd therefor really wouldnÂt want to limit things to a layer approach.
> > > > > Actually, I hardly ever layer textures in Maya on a specific channel
> > > > > but do often layer entire materials, or misuse a material to get the
> > > > > illuminated areas (including the parts partly occluded by shadow)
> > > > > as a way to select areas and do another operation on those.
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Unsubscribe? Mail Majordomo(at)Softimage.COM with the following text in 
> > body:
> > unsubscribe xsi
>
> --
> Rendering Theory: It either renders or it doesn't.



---
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