RE: Replacing the shadertree? Possible?

["Halfdan Ingvarsson" <hingvars(at)Softimage.COM>]

If an xsi list thread starts in the forest, and Rob's not there to comment on it, is it really a thread?

 

 - ½

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto:owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM]On Behalf Of brad friedman
Sent: Thursday, 29 June, 2006 12:21
To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
Subject: Re: Replacing the shadertree? Possible?

Then why interject at all?

 

-brad

Robert Moodie <robertm(at)hybride.com> wrote:

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"
To:
Sent: Thursday, Junee 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 écrit :
> 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 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,,
>>>>>
>>>>> it´s 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. It´s also great if you don´t 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> I´d therefor really wouldn´t 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:
>>>t; 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