[Bf-cycles] SceneRenderLayers settings and 2.8

[Brecht Van Lommel]

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Dalai Felinto <dfelinto at gmail.com> wrote:

> >> * mat_override [override]
> >> * light_override [override]
> >
> > Where would the original setting be stored, Scene, SceneLayer, Object?
>
> For material overrides the original setting would still be
> object.materials[0].material.
>

That won't work if the object has multiple materials, or the material is
assigned to the mesh instead of the object? I think this would be better as
a SceneLayer setting, it's common enough that it needs to be convenient I
think. We might also want to make it smarter in the future so it doesn't
override mesh lights.


> > It would be easiest to keep these settings in the SceneRenderLayer,
> though
> > per layer control could be useful in some cases.
>
> Just to be clear. The idea is to get rid of SceneRenderLayer
> altogether. So the settings "kept" in SceneRenderLayer will actually
> be "moved" to SceneLayer.
> So I don't understand what you mean by keep these settings in the
> SceneRenderLayer/SceneLayer but having it exposed as per-layer as
> well.


Right.


> > would effectively be light groups though, which Cycles does not support.
>
> Technically this is a special kind of overrides that is different than
> the others (since it doesn't override an existing settings). Since
> Cycles doesn't support it and we are deprecated Blender Internal my
> suggestion is to drop this altogether actually. That said if Cycles
> wants it, it can be a property of SceneLayer.


Actually I was confused here, making this work per collection would be like
light groups. Per SceneLayer can be made to work relatively easily, but
there's not much point because you can use collections to add lights to a
layer or not. So we could drop this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-cycles/attachments/20171114/8672d0cd/attachment.html>