<div style="text-align:-webkit-auto"><span style>Christophe</span> , You are right, simplicity, faster workflow, and powerful possibilities is what all tools are meant to be, and in my opinion Brecht with His design is going straight in that direction, the issue right now is that work is still in progress, with Cycles you got powerful possibilities and faster workflow, only left is more simplicity, and that is part of the final stage where all those modular and powerful tools can be group together in simple to use presets and group nodes. I think what is really lacking to fulfill your need is an Asset Manager, where you can save your custom nodes setup, presets, images, meshes , label at will and re use them easily, while at the same time maintain and extend the low level/flexible workflow .</div>
<div><br></div>Cheers.<div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">2012/3/28 Christophe Leyder <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:shotalot@gmail.com">shotalot@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><span><font face="Arial">Hey
Brecht,</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">Im really loving how
Cycles is coming along, but I have a slight concern about the direction the
shading workflow is taking.</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">Currently, in the
materials tab, the shaders presented with Cycles feel very "technical" and
un-artist friendly, let me explain why:</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">"Glossy BSDF",
"Transparent BSDF", "Transcusent BSDF", "Diffuse BSDF" to me as an artist should
be parts of a shader, not individual shaders. </font></span></div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">To elaborate, from
using a whole lot of other engines these past few years, the one thing they have
in common is they have unification. Unfication in Blender in general is
seriously lacking, and I would hate to see Cycles go even further down that
road. My suggestion is:</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">Have a "basic"
shader with the current "shaders" combined, (I really dont know the maths and
stuff behind this though). </font></span><span><font face="Arial">Rather have the current scattered system as inputs in the
nodes system, because by all means, they WILL be usefull there, if someone wants
to use them individually, they can plug them straight into the material output.
</font></span><span><font face="Arial">To add, in
my experience, a Mix shader shouldnt be a "shader" at all, rather a function in
the node tree. eg. Changing the colour of a texture, or placing a decal on a
shader; and of course what it does now, mixing shaders.</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">Or to be even safer,
just add the "basic" shader to the materials list thats already there, and leave
the shaders that are there as is.</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">Just my 2 cents from
an artists standpoint! :)</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span><font face="Arial">Thanks</font></span></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div align="left"><font face="Calibri"><b><i>Christophe
Leyder</i></b></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Calibri"><b><i>3D
Artist\Animator</i></b></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Calibri"><b><i><img width="96" height="37"></i></b></font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial"><a title="blocked::http://www.luma.co.za/" href="http://www.luma.co.za/" target="_blank">www.luma.co.za</a></font></div><br><br>
</font></span><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Bf-cycles mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Bf-cycles@blender.org">Bf-cycles@blender.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-cycles" target="_blank">http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-cycles</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>