<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body><div><div style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Just to clarify things. That's not not my branch. I just saw that on BA and thought that it could be a grew starting point.<br><br>The creator is Clement Focault. I don't if he is aware of this mailing list . If that's the case he should be invited . </div></div><div dir="ltr"><hr><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">De: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><a href="mailto:bf-viewport-request@blender.org">bf-viewport-request@blender.org</a></span><br><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">Enviado: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">13/01/2016 23:18</span><br><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">Para: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><a href="mailto:bf-viewport@blender.org">bf-viewport@blender.org</a></span><br><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; font-weight: bold;">Asunto: </span><span style="font-family: Calibri,sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;">Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 5</span><br><br></div>Send Bf-viewport mailing list submissions to<br> bf-viewport@blender.org<br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br> bf-viewport-request@blender.org<br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at<br> bf-viewport-owner@blender.org<br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>than "Re: Contents of Bf-viewport digest..."<br><br><br>Today's Topics:<br><br> 1. Re: PBR Build (Yury Baranov)<br> 2. Re: PBR Build (Mike Erwin)<br> 3. Re: PBR Build (Aaron Carlisle)<br><br><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>Message: 1<br>Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:11:58 +0300<br>From: Yury Baranov <cucumberer@gmail.com><br>Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] PBR Build<br>To: bf-viewport@blender.org<br>Message-ID:<br> <CAGuDNv2Fc+TNo+9fqjjbBjeWECv0PwzRMXQuoL6o9pFy=MKepg@mail.gmail.com><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br><br>(just a ordinary Blender user comment) This is almost perfect. Thank you so<br>much for the link.<br><br>2016-01-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Jorge Losilla <thexchanger@gmail.com>:<br><br>> This a PBR branch compatible with cycles that is currently working<br>><br>> http://www.clement-foucault.com/#blender_pbr<br>><br>> Maybe this could help.<br>> ------------------------------<br>> De: bf-viewport-request@blender.org<br>> Enviado: ?10/?01/?2016 12:00<br>> Para: bf-viewport@blender.org<br>> Asunto: Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 2<br>><br>> Send Bf-viewport mailing list submissions to<br>> bf-viewport@blender.org<br>><br>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>> bf-viewport-request@blender.org<br>><br>> You can reach the person managing the list at<br>> bf-viewport-owner@blender.org<br>><br>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>> than "Re: Contents of Bf-viewport digest..."<br>><br>><br>> Today's Topics:<br>><br>> 1. Re: [Bf-gamedev] Viewport and shader system patches<br>> (Ton Roosendaal)<br>><br>><br>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>><br>> Message: 1<br>> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 15:49:19 +0100<br>> From: Ton Roosendaal <ton@blender.org><br>> Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] [Bf-gamedev] Viewport and shader system<br>> patches<br>> To: bf-viewport@blender.org, bf-gamedev@blender.org<br>> Message-ID: <9A2405D9-803F-4A90-B074-B17A79F98DC6@blender.org><br>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<br>><br>> Hi Brecht,<br>><br>> "Vision" is a big word, it can mean a lot. Currently there's nobody with<br>> sufficient time to tackle the design, that's true. But such problems could<br>> be solved by active recruitment and/or funding.<br>><br>> What I miss is a mention of using the Unreal shader design. It was<br>> suggested to align as close as possible to Unreal shaders for our 2.8<br>> viewport, and use that to make viewport previz possible for Cycles or other<br>> engines.<br>><br>> I also miss active contributors giving feedback. It's not so much about<br>> ideas or visions, I want to hear what people would suggest to work on,<br>> however small it is.<br>><br>> Alexander: there's a whole lot of open patches from you indeed. I think we<br>> should more seriously look into that with high priority. For as long things<br>> stay compatible (old files render same), we can be quite flexible here.<br>> Provided you're around to maintain the issues a chance causes of course.<br>><br>> Laters,<br>><br>> -Ton-<br>><br>> --------------------------------------------------------<br>> Ton Roosendaal - ton@blender.org - www.blender.org<br>> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute<br>> Entrepotdok 57A - 1018AD Amsterdam - The Netherlands<br>><br>><br>><br>> > On 8 Jan, 2016, at 19:26, Brecht Van Lommel <brechtvanlommel@pandora.be><br>> wrote:<br>> ><br>> > Ok, so it seems that currently there isn't really a vision for a<br>> > better realtime shading system. At least not from people reading the<br>> > bf-viewport and bf-gamedev mailing lists.<br>> ><br>> > I'll review the patches that seem reasonable to me and don't really<br>> > break compatibility, and those can go into Blender 2.77. For bigger<br>> > changes someone else would need to take the responsibility.<br>> ><br>> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:48 PM, <a.romanov@blend4web.com> wrote:<br>> >><br>> >>> Adding these Cycles node features to BI seems all reasonable to me,<br>> >>> particularly if the target would be to unify things more with Cycles<br>> >>> material nodes instead of adding a completely new system<br>> >>> specifically<br>> >>> for the viewport.<br>> >> It's very good, because we are primarily interested in such things.<br>> >> And patches with support for BI and GLSL could even go into the 2.7<br>> >> branch as it does not break backward compatibility, isn't it?<br>> >><br>> >>><br>> >>> The issue with incremental changes is that you're also pretty much<br>> >>> forced to incrementally break compatibility over many Blender<br>> >>> versions, which is annoying for users. If it was mostly about<br>> >>> parameters, just adding a new PBR material node would be a good<br>> >>> solution for compatibility.<br>> >>><br>> >> Primarily we are interested in the stable branch of viewport<br>> >> corresponding to current state of BI. So it could be 2.7 branch with<br>> >> simplified material workflow, that could be done by adding a new PBR<br>> >> material node.<br>> >><br>> >>> But there's issues with the way lights and materials interact, how<br>> >>> transparency and ray tracing are wrong in subtle ways, distinctions<br>> >>> between specular/reflection and diffuse/environment light, and more.<br>> >>> In my experience keeping those exceptions while also adding a new<br>> >>> PBR<br>> >>> mode makes the code extremely complicated.<br>> >>><br>> >>> I don't want to go into too much detail here, but here's some old<br>> >>> notes about design issues if you're interested:<br>> >>><br>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:2.5/Source/ShadingSystem/Implementation<br>> >>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Brecht/RenderIdeas<br>> >>><br>> >> Thanks for the tip. I need more deeply to learn.<br>> >><br>> >>> Anyway, maybe it is fine to incrementally break compatibility during<br>> >>> the Blender 2.8 release cycle and users will just have to accept<br>> >>> that?<br>> >>> Whatever way we do this, it would still be good to have some kind of<br>> >>> vision for what the end result should be.<br>> >> In Blend4Web we keep deprecated features in 3-5 releases and our users<br>> >> have time to adjust. But we have releases per month.<br>> >> It's important to understand exactly what is the aim of the first<br>> >> release of 2.8. I'm also not sure I understand. But, from the<br>> >> conversation it seems to me that BI should stay.<br>> >><br>> >><br>> >> _______________________________________________<br>> >> Bf-viewport mailing list<br>> >> Bf-viewport@blender.org<br>> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > Bf-gamedev mailing list<br>> > Bf-gamedev@blender.org<br>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev<br>><br>><br>><br>> ------------------------------<br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Bf-viewport mailing list<br>> Bf-viewport@blender.org<br>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br>><br>><br>> End of Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 2<br>> *****************************************<br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Bf-viewport mailing list<br>> Bf-viewport@blender.org<br>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br>><br>><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160113/97349f88/attachment-0001.htm <br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 2<br>Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:51:19 -0500<br>From: Mike Erwin <significant.bit@gmail.com><br>Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] PBR Build<br>To: bf-viewport@blender.org<br>Message-ID:<br> <CAHF3-VdDeSTXFbWBSQ0JsJc73kPP+W0vODnvsmb_VOR-EMUwnQ@mail.gmail.com><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br><br>CC'ing my response on blenderartists.org:<br><br><br>Freaking awesome! I don't know where to begin...<br><br>Cl?ment is your branch updated with the latest GL 2.1 changes in master?<br>Nothing too disruptive there right now, but I anticipate big changes to GL<br>drawing code in the near future. Let's work together to get these results<br>in Blender itself. I'll start looking at your GitHub repos & see if the<br>code is as hacky as you describe :).<br><br>Also, Intel GPUs aren't as crap as they were 5+ years ago. HD 4000 and<br>newer should be supported by anything in "official" Blender. There's even a<br>proposal to support the HD 3000 in Blender 2.8 even though it doesn't quite<br>handle OpenGL 3.2. I'm on the fence about that one but it's worth noting.<br><br>-- Mike Erwin<br><br>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Yury Baranov <cucumberer@gmail.com> wrote:<br><br>> (just a ordinary Blender user comment) This is almost perfect. Thank you<br>> so much for the link.<br>><br>> 2016-01-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Jorge Losilla <thexchanger@gmail.com>:<br>><br>>> This a PBR branch compatible with cycles that is currently working<br>>><br>>> http://www.clement-foucault.com/#blender_pbr<br>>><br>>> Maybe this could help.<br>>><br>><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160113/ef689e87/attachment-0001.htm <br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 3<br>Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:18:48 -0500<br>From: Aaron Carlisle <carlisle.aaron00@gmail.com><br>Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] PBR Build<br>To: bf-viewport@blender.org<br>Message-ID:<br> <CAEX7TpVTxzM-pRbSfu8Jr4VZyePtgfU-AcMsKkkOPZBo3FPScQ@mail.gmail.com><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br><br>This looks very promising. Thanks for sharing.<br>I had only a couple crashes but that may be<br>because I only have an Intel HD 4600. I am<br>Going to try later with a Nvidia 950m.<br><br>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Mike Erwin <significant.bit@gmail.com><br>wrote:<br><br>> CC'ing my response on blenderartists.org:<br>><br>><br>> Freaking awesome! I don't know where to begin...<br>><br>> Cl?ment is your branch updated with the latest GL 2.1 changes in master?<br>> Nothing too disruptive there right now, but I anticipate big changes to GL<br>> drawing code in the near future. Let's work together to get these results<br>> in Blender itself. I'll start looking at your GitHub repos & see if the<br>> code is as hacky as you describe :).<br>><br>> Also, Intel GPUs aren't as crap as they were 5+ years ago. HD 4000 and<br>> newer should be supported by anything in "official" Blender. There's even a<br>> proposal to support the HD 3000 in Blender 2.8 even though it doesn't quite<br>> handle OpenGL 3.2. I'm on the fence about that one but it's worth noting.<br>><br>> -- Mike Erwin<br>><br>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Yury Baranov <cucumberer@gmail.com><br>> wrote:<br>><br>>> (just a ordinary Blender user comment) This is almost perfect. Thank you<br>>> so much for the link.<br>>><br>>> 2016-01-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Jorge Losilla <thexchanger@gmail.com>:<br>>><br>>>> This a PBR branch compatible with cycles that is currently working<br>>>><br>>>> http://www.clement-foucault.com/#blender_pbr<br>>>><br>>>> Maybe this could help.<br>>>><br>>><br>><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> Bf-viewport mailing list<br>> Bf-viewport@blender.org<br>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br>><br>><br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160113/2e8159bf/attachment.htm <br><br>------------------------------<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Bf-viewport mailing list<br>Bf-viewport@blender.org<br>http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport<br><br><br>End of Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 5<br>*****************************************<br></body></html>