Re: New ZBump

["Gene Crucean" <emailgeneonthelist(at)gmail.com>]

I agree with what your saying Chris but at least try and cut them a little slack. Imagine if you worked for Soft and everything you said was taken as "the official response" of the company. I'm sure halfy is just giving his opinion and it shouldn't be taken for more than that.

With that said bump mapping is very important, period. I don't think anyone is arguing that but if it's more work than most people think to properly implement, then take Ben's source and use that inside XSI and improve on what he already has until you can get the "proper" version implemented. If his shader was at least distributed with XSI... that alone would probably make people happy enough to sit tight for a while.

On 12/1/06, Chris Marshall <chris(at)eclipsecreative.co.uk> wrote:

...and, if you don't mind me saying, if your rather light-hearted reply
to this very important issue is the official Softimage response, frankly
I find it rather disturbing!
I just wonder how many other people on this list *don't* want
bumpmapping to be fixed?


Chris Marshall wrote:
> Whether trivial or non-trivial, decent bumpmapping is an extremely important
> feature required in XSI.
> My concern about individuals writing plugins, that we become heavily reliant on,
> is that if they (the plugin)  goes wrong (which zbump did) and the individual
> isn't available to help fix the problem, then I'm in doodoo deeper than a
> celebrity waiting to eat a sheeps testicle in front of millions of viewers. If I
> had a problem with nice shiny new XSI Bump node, I would get support from
> (potentially) a number of skilled people at Soft.
> Fortunately for me, when I had a problem with ZBump, Ben *was* available and
> managed to deliver very quickly a fixed version of the plugin. But, if he had
> been away from his desk on that day, I would have been in (said) doodoo's. Which
> is somewhere I'd rather not be.
>
>
>
> Halfdan Ingvarsson wrote:
> > It's a deeper problem than just doing a bump node. To do bump properly requires supporting tangents on polymesh objects. That would give a local coordinate system for each vertex, which is something that NURBS have, by definition, but polymeshes don't. This'll also help with anisotropic materials, normals maps, toon shading, along with a lot of other interesting things.
> >
> > It requires some development effort but if everyone requests it, it moves up the list.
> >
> > It's like the congress down south. You gotta lobby for your feature in need. And if you throw me some money... well... you know... wheels get greased :)
> >
> >  - ½
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM [mailto: owner-xsi(at)Softimage.COM] On Behalf Of Chris Marshall
> > Sent: 1-Dec-06 08:00
> > To: XSI(at)Softimage.COM
> > Subject: Re: New ZBump
> >
> > I wonder whether XSI 6 will include a 'working' bump node?
> > Not that it matters, of course, we have ZBump. But it'll be interesting
> > to see if we still have to rely on people like Ben to provide us with
> > some of the most basic of tools.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bernard Lebel wrote:
> >
> >> Absolutely. Send the sources over, and if you got the make file,
> >> please include it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Bernard
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/30/06, Ben Rogall <brogall(at)excite.com> wrote:
> >> Btw if you have the time and inclination to do a linux compile, I'd be
> >> happy to post it.
> >> ---
> >> 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
> >
>
> --- 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