[Bf-viewport] Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 5

Thu Jan 14 00:23:20 CET 2016

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.

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 . 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: "bf-viewport-request at blender.org" <bf-viewport-request at blender.org>
Enviado: ‎13/‎01/‎2016 23:18
Para: "bf-viewport at blender.org" <bf-viewport at blender.org>
Asunto: Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 5

Send Bf-viewport mailing list submissions to
	bf-viewport at blender.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	bf-viewport-request at blender.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	bf-viewport-owner at blender.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Bf-viewport digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: PBR Build (Yury Baranov)
   2. Re: PBR Build (Mike Erwin)
   3. Re: PBR Build (Aaron Carlisle)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:11:58 +0300
From: Yury Baranov <cucumberer at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] PBR Build
To: bf-viewport at blender.org
Message-ID:
	<CAGuDNv2Fc+TNo+9fqjjbBjeWECv0PwzRMXQuoL6o9pFy=MKepg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

(just a ordinary Blender user comment) This is almost perfect. Thank you so
much for the link.

2016-01-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Jorge Losilla <thexchanger at gmail.com>:

> This a PBR branch compatible with cycles that is currently working
>
> http://www.clement-foucault.com/#blender_pbr
>
> Maybe this could help.
> ------------------------------
> De: bf-viewport-request at blender.org
> Enviado: ?10/?01/?2016 12:00
> Para: bf-viewport at blender.org
> Asunto: Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 2
>
> Send Bf-viewport mailing list submissions to
> bf-viewport at blender.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> bf-viewport-request at blender.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> bf-viewport-owner at blender.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Bf-viewport digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: [Bf-gamedev]  Viewport and shader system patches
>       (Ton Roosendaal)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2016 15:49:19 +0100
> From: Ton Roosendaal <ton at blender.org>
> Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] [Bf-gamedev]  Viewport and shader system
> patches
> To: bf-viewport at blender.org, bf-gamedev at blender.org
> Message-ID: <9A2405D9-803F-4A90-B074-B17A79F98DC6 at blender.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Hi Brecht,
>
> "Vision" is a big word, it can mean a lot. Currently there's nobody with
> sufficient time to tackle the design, that's true. But such problems could
> be solved by active recruitment and/or funding.
>
> What I miss is a mention of using the Unreal shader design. It was
> suggested to align as close as possible to Unreal shaders for our 2.8
> viewport, and use that to make viewport previz possible for Cycles or other
> engines.
>
> I also miss active contributors giving feedback. It's not so much about
> ideas or visions, I want to hear what people would suggest to work on,
> however small it is.
>
> Alexander: there's a whole lot of open patches from you indeed. I think we
> should more seriously look into that with high priority. For as long things
> stay compatible (old files render same), we can be quite flexible here.
> Provided you're around to maintain the issues a chance causes of course.
>
> Laters,
>
> -Ton-
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Ton Roosendaal  -  ton at blender.org   -   www.blender.org
> Chairman Blender Foundation - Producer Blender Institute
> Entrepotdok 57A  -  1018AD Amsterdam  -  The Netherlands
>
>
>
> > On 8 Jan, 2016, at 19:26, Brecht Van Lommel <brechtvanlommel at pandora.be>
> wrote:
> >
> > Ok, so it seems that currently there isn't really a vision for a
> > better realtime shading system. At least not from people reading the
> > bf-viewport and bf-gamedev mailing lists.
> >
> > I'll review the patches that seem reasonable to me and don't really
> > break compatibility, and those can go into Blender 2.77. For bigger
> > changes someone else would need to take the responsibility.
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:48 PM,  <a.romanov at blend4web.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Adding these Cycles node features to BI seems all reasonable to me,
> >>> particularly if the target would be to unify things more with Cycles
> >>> material nodes instead of adding a completely new system
> >>> specifically
> >>> for the viewport.
> >> It's very good, because we are primarily interested in such things.
> >> And patches with support for BI and GLSL could even go into the 2.7
> >> branch as it does not break backward compatibility, isn't it?
> >>
> >>>
> >>> The issue with incremental changes is that you're also pretty much
> >>> forced to incrementally break compatibility over many Blender
> >>> versions, which is annoying for users. If it was mostly about
> >>> parameters, just adding a new PBR material node would be a good
> >>> solution for compatibility.
> >>>
> >> Primarily we are interested in the stable branch of viewport
> >> corresponding to current state of BI. So it could be 2.7 branch with
> >> simplified material workflow, that could be done by adding a new PBR
> >> material node.
> >>
> >>> But there's issues with the way lights and materials interact, how
> >>> transparency and ray tracing are wrong in subtle ways, distinctions
> >>> between specular/reflection and diffuse/environment light, and more.
> >>> In my experience keeping those exceptions while also adding a new
> >>> PBR
> >>> mode makes the code extremely complicated.
> >>>
> >>> I don't want to go into too much detail here, but here's some old
> >>> notes about design issues if you're interested:
> >>>
> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:2.5/Source/ShadingSystem/Implementation
> >>> http://wiki.blender.org/index.php/User:Brecht/RenderIdeas
> >>>
> >> Thanks for the tip. I need more deeply to learn.
> >>
> >>> Anyway, maybe it is fine to incrementally break compatibility during
> >>> the Blender 2.8 release cycle and users will just have to accept
> >>> that?
> >>> Whatever way we do this, it would still be good to have some kind of
> >>> vision for what the end result should be.
> >> In Blend4Web we keep deprecated features in 3-5 releases and our users
> >> have time to adjust. But we have releases per month.
> >> It's important to understand exactly what is the aim of the first
> >> release of 2.8. I'm also not sure I understand. But, from the
> >> conversation it seems to me that BI should stay.
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bf-viewport mailing list
> >> Bf-viewport at blender.org
> >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bf-gamedev mailing list
> > Bf-gamedev at blender.org
> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-gamedev
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-viewport mailing list
> Bf-viewport at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport
>
>
> End of Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 2
> *****************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-viewport mailing list
> Bf-viewport at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160113/97349f88/attachment-0001.htm 

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 14:51:19 -0500
From: Mike Erwin <significant.bit at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] PBR Build
To: bf-viewport at blender.org
Message-ID:
	<CAHF3-VdDeSTXFbWBSQ0JsJc73kPP+W0vODnvsmb_VOR-EMUwnQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

CC'ing my response on blenderartists.org:

Freaking awesome! I don't know where to begin...

Cl?ment is your branch updated with the latest GL 2.1 changes in master?
Nothing too disruptive there right now, but I anticipate big changes to GL
drawing code in the near future. Let's work together to get these results
in Blender itself. I'll start looking at your GitHub repos & see if the
code is as hacky as you describe :).

Also, Intel GPUs aren't as crap as they were 5+ years ago. HD 4000 and
newer should be supported by anything in "official" Blender. There's even a
proposal to support the HD 3000 in Blender 2.8 even though it doesn't quite
handle OpenGL 3.2. I'm on the fence about that one but it's worth noting.

-- Mike Erwin

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Yury Baranov <cucumberer at gmail.com> wrote:

> (just a ordinary Blender user comment) This is almost perfect. Thank you
> so much for the link.
>
> 2016-01-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Jorge Losilla <thexchanger at gmail.com>:
>
>> This a PBR branch compatible with cycles that is currently working
>>
>> http://www.clement-foucault.com/#blender_pbr
>>
>> Maybe this could help.
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160113/ef689e87/attachment-0001.htm 

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2016 17:18:48 -0500
From: Aaron Carlisle <carlisle.aaron00 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Bf-viewport] PBR Build
To: bf-viewport at blender.org
Message-ID:
	<CAEX7TpVTxzM-pRbSfu8Jr4VZyePtgfU-AcMsKkkOPZBo3FPScQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

This looks very promising. Thanks for sharing.
I had only a couple crashes but that may be
because I only have an Intel HD 4600. I am
Going to try later with a Nvidia 950m.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Mike Erwin <significant.bit at gmail.com>
wrote:

> CC'ing my response on blenderartists.org:
>
>
> Freaking awesome! I don't know where to begin...
>
> Cl?ment is your branch updated with the latest GL 2.1 changes in master?
> Nothing too disruptive there right now, but I anticipate big changes to GL
> drawing code in the near future. Let's work together to get these results
> in Blender itself. I'll start looking at your GitHub repos & see if the
> code is as hacky as you describe :).
>
> Also, Intel GPUs aren't as crap as they were 5+ years ago. HD 4000 and
> newer should be supported by anything in "official" Blender. There's even a
> proposal to support the HD 3000 in Blender 2.8 even though it doesn't quite
> handle OpenGL 3.2. I'm on the fence about that one but it's worth noting.
>
> -- Mike Erwin
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:11 AM, Yury Baranov <cucumberer at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> (just a ordinary Blender user comment) This is almost perfect. Thank you
>> so much for the link.
>>
>> 2016-01-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Jorge Losilla <thexchanger at gmail.com>:
>>
>>> This a PBR branch compatible with cycles that is currently working
>>>
>>> http://www.clement-foucault.com/#blender_pbr
>>>
>>> Maybe this could help.
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-viewport mailing list
> Bf-viewport at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160113/2e8159bf/attachment.htm 

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Bf-viewport mailing list
Bf-viewport at blender.org
http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-viewport

End of Bf-viewport Digest, Vol 6, Issue 5
*****************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-viewport/attachments/20160114/c3618e32/attachment-0001.htm 