[Bf-committers] Texture assignment workflow is confusing

Mon May 10 09:45:56 CEST 2010

Don't you think it's a little hard to tell what's going into the
material and what's coming out with that suggestion?

On 5/10/10, Damir Prebeg <blend.factory at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've started this topic so It's would be rude from me not to suggest
> something. First of all I like Bassam suggestion about nodes, here is my
> suggestion how this should look.
>
> http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=3202
>
> I think image is pretty much self explanatory but if someone need more
> detailed description I will send it.
>
> On top of this, I also like Doug's proposition for sockets witch could be
> applied for direct assignment of image/tex compund/some-other-node-type to
> Diffuse, Transparency or what ever...
>
> Workflow could be like this:
>
> I wish to assign some texture (node) to Diffuse channel.
>
> I click on a button beside Difuse color and that shows me drop-down
> selector. In that drop-down I have scrollable list of available node types
> with ability to launch file selector and node editor (Ctrl+click on buton
> that shows that drop-down would launch node editor automatically after some
> imaga/node is selected)
>
>
> On 9 May 2010 07:43, Doug Ollivier <doug at flipdesign.co.nz> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Just curious what the next step is to see if this goes anywhere.  Is
>> it...?
>>
>> 1) Have this topic raised at next meeting, to work out if it is
>> something worth exploring from a user?software structure stand-point
>> 2) Create a UI proposal exploring the issue and proposing solutions? and
>> then discussing this at a meeting?
>>
>> I assume that because the topic went quiet, that there was agreement (or
>> not disagreement) with the idea of a Socket type influence system.
>>
>> Cheers.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>> On 30/04/2010 1:52 p.m., Doug Ollivier wrote:
>> > Awesome,  was curious how light-wave did it.
>> >
>> > They are all seeming relatively similar with minor differences in
>> approach.
>> >
>> > Any wild cards out there from strange softwares etc?
>> >
>> > On 30/04/2010 1:40 p.m., Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ive suggested this type of texture managing in the past inspired on
>> >> Lightwave where you can assign a texture or a texture stack to each
>> >> value
>> >>
>> >> Material properties with a T icon to launch texture stack
>> >>
>> >> http://www.except.nl/lightwave/hdr/images/Surface_notgood_sm.png
>> >>
>> >> Texture Stack
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://www.robinwood.com/Catalog/Technical/LightwaveTuts/LWPacks/StainedGlass/SGlassImages/SGlass19B-LayerStack.jpg
>> >>
>> >> nice...
>> >>
>> >> Daniel Salazar
>> >> www.3developer.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Doug Ollivier<doug at doug.org.nz>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On 30/04/2010 3:49 a.m., Knapp wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> I only use Blender but I was wondering if the other 3d packages have
>> >>>> found a good way to handle this texture/materials problem? Could we
>> >>>> incorporate some good ideas this way? Why reinvent the wheel? Does
>> >>>> anyone have a favorite other system? How does it work?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I am not putting down the other ideas given so far, just hoping to
>> >>>> find all the options before we pick the best.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>> For those who have just joined my concept is to move the texture
>> >>> assignment to the point of control/use/influence when setting up a
>> >>> material in order to create a semantic/logicial link between action
>> >>> and
>> >>> affect : http://www.pasteall.org/pic/show.php?id=2989
>> >>>
>> >>> Note: I dislike submitting ideas and saying they were influenced by
>> >>> the
>> >>> big boys, because I find it sometimes elicits a "we don't want to
>> >>> copy"
>> >>> response, and forces us to reinvent the wheel due to the pride of
>> >>> being
>> >>> independent and creative. However, pride aside, I agree that looking
>> >>> at
>> >>> how others have solved a problem, and then improving on their
>> >>> solutions
>> >>> is one of the best methods of development, its not revolutionary, but
>> >>> nor were puffer-fish, they evolved from something way less exciting.
>> >>>
>> >>> I'll outline the two softwares that I have used that give any real
>> >>> control over multiple textures, I am curious what great softwares
>> others
>> >>> have used that solve these issues. But to sum it up I found the
>> >>> easiest
>> >>> to use ones use a socket type system.  The non-flexible ones with nice
>> >>> results (cad rendering packages) give few if not no options so I just
>> >>> won't mention them.
>> >>>
>> >>> *Photoshop 3D tools,*
>> >>> They use a limited socket type system,  either a colour, or a single
>> >>> image per value of influence.
>> >>> I.e. you can choose an image for the reflection channel, colour
>> channel,
>> >>> spec channel....
>> >>> Super easy, pretty limited, but limited in order to be compatible with
>> >>> real-time 3D content in PDF's etc...
>> >>> Since you are in photoshop you can edit the images, and this is where
>> >>> you can add layers and overlay options etc... to get what you want in
>> >>> terms of further control.
>> >>>
>> >>> *Maya (it's been a while, this is from memory)*
>> >>> Uses something in-between what I am suggesting and the photoshop
>> >>> approach.  Just like the Blender 2.5 materials panel; each material or
>> >>> setting is broken up into a sub panel that can be turned on/off for
>> >>> any
>> >>> one effect (incredibly close to the current Blender layout). However,
>> >>> they use a socket type texture/node/material input to alter various
>> >>> settings that cannot be controlled simply by a slider or colour
>> >>> picker.
>> >>> I believe their implementation is even used to plug in 3rd party
>> Plugins
>> >>> like SSS, Ramp, and fresnel effects to the various channels etc...
>> >>> (not
>> >>> just textures).  This linked approach also creates a hypergraph
>> >>> (nodes)
>> >>> structure.  I had no idea how to use that then so ignored it.
>> >>>
>> >>> My biggest annoyance with the Maya system was getting lost once a
>> >>> texture has been added, as it dropped you somewhere else in the
>> >>> interface that you did not expect (a challenge we would need to
>> >>> overcome, but one I think is possible).
>> >>>
>> >>> I am glad brecht suggested this or something similar, as he's pretty
>> >>> on
>> >>> to it, especially when it comes to getting large numbers of fans.
>> >>>
>> >>> If this approach is preferred, and is backed up by a development goal
>> >>> from the decision makers (If Ton sanctions exploring it it etc..), I
>> >>> will be willing to work through interface issues with Matt, and
>> >>> William
>> >>> (these are the two people focusing on interface correct?).
>> >>>
>> >>> The main interface issues to overcome as I can see it are.
>> >>>
>> >>> ** Materials - how to keep these tabs clean from fluff
>> >>> ** Texture application settings - Where and how do you edit these
>> >>> settings that are unique to each material (not to the texture)
>> >>> ** Texture settings - the traditional 2.4x datablock, how do you get
>> >>> to
>> >>> this and back again from a material, and a potential intermediate step
>> >>> ** Adding and mixing - The current system lets you add and mix
>> >>> multiple
>> >>> textures, how can this be easily and logically done? (nodes?,
>> stacks?...)
>> >>> ** extending into the future... Plugins Etc - I think some of this
>> >>> will
>> >>> come for free if this is a natural step towards "nodes everywhere".
>> >>>
>> >>> I think there are no issues that cannot be overcome. and I think that
>> >>> old textures can be loaded into a new interface with full
>> compatibility.
>> >>>
>> >>> Someone let me know if this warrants further development and I will
>> look
>> >>> at creating a more detailed interface flow scenario.
>> >>>
>> >>> By trade i'm an Industrial Designer, so can look at usability and
>> >>> interaction, I'm not a coder unfortunately so cannot help there.
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Doug Ollivier
>> >>>
>> >>> *C:*    +64 (0)27 412 0807
>> >>> *P:*    +64 (0)3 980 7197
>> >>> *E:*    doug at doug.org.nz
>> >>> *W:*    http://doug.org.nz
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> >>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> >>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Bf-committers mailing list
>> >> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

>From Luke