Really need an IOR texture map

Generic forum to discuss Octane Render, post ideas and suggest improvements.
Forum rules
Please add your OS and Hardware Configuration in your signature, it makes it easier for us to help you analyze problems. Example: Win 7 64 | Geforce GTX680 | i7 3770 | 16GB
Post Reply
fatrobotsneedlove
Licensed Customer
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 7:06 am

I know this has been brought up before, but this is a really really big missing feature for me. Substance Painter/Designer now has easy export settings for Vray, Arnold, Corona, and Redshift. (Mari 3 even has actual shaders for Vray, Redshift, and Arnold)

The Allegorithmic team tried to make a Painter/designer export for Octane but couldn't because of the lack of an IOR texture input.

I know there was talk of a possible OSL solution in the future with V3, but is there some limitation of the engine that would make it really difficult to implement now with the Glossy Material?

It's just really frustrating to have such a great workflow with Vray, which I still use occasionally, in Painter now and soon with Mari, while having to jump through hoops with Octane to get everything looking right. Along with a lack of UDIM support, this is really cramping my workflow.

Any chance something could be worked out? Or will we just have to wait and see what options OSL brings?
4x 2080ti hybrids, 4x 980ti Hyrbids. C4D, Houdini.
User avatar
Goldorak
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 2321
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:09 pm
Contact:

fatrobotsneedlove wrote:I know this has been brought up before, but this is a really really big missing feature for me. Substance Painter/Designer now has easy export settings for Vray, Arnold, Corona, and Redshift. (Mari 3 even has actual shaders for Vray, Redshift, and Arnold)

The Allegorithmic team tried to make a Painter/designer export for Octane but couldn't because of the lack of an IOR texture input.

I know there was talk of a possible OSL solution in the future with V3, but is there some limitation of the engine that would make it really difficult to implement now with the Glossy Material?

It's just really frustrating to have such a great workflow with Vray, which I still use occasionally, in Painter now and soon with Mari, while having to jump through hoops with Octane to get everything looking right. Along with a lack of UDIM support, this is really cramping my workflow.

Any chance something could be worked out? Or will we just have to wait and see what options OSL brings?
I am in agreement that an IOR texture input pin is important. We are close enough with the release of V3 where an OSL solution should be the way we resolve this and any other missing shader functionality not in 2.x. UDIM is a higher level feature that can be implemented in the host app on top of Octane itself. We may look into formal low level support at the end of the 3.x dev cycle if necessary.

I will talk to the team and see how much time it might take to get IOR texture input in the final 2.x release. It may not be the best use of dev resources to delay V3 over this, but we will look into it.
fatrobotsneedlove
Licensed Customer
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 7:06 am

Thanks for the reply. I would agree, no need to delay V3 when it's so close. I have a lot of fire and explosion vdbs from houdini I really want to start playing with in Octane :D

But I would really appreciate it if an OSL solution for the IOR textures can be worked out as quickly as possible once V3 ships.

As far as UDIM's, the Modo implementation looks really good. But I use standalone on an Octane dedicated render machine so I can keep modeling/comping on my workstation while I render. So a standalone UDIM implementation at some point would also be greatly appreciated.
4x 2080ti hybrids, 4x 980ti Hyrbids. C4D, Houdini.
kacperspala
Licensed Customer
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:06 pm

Yes yes yes ! Same reasons here, please do IOR tex pin for quixel/substance workflows :D It would be great to have that in v3 at release : )
ryzer 2700x
rtx 2080Ti
User avatar
Polygons
Licensed Customer
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2015 2:57 am

Raising this thread from the dead to add to the users requesting IOR maps. I can save considerable time by having an IOR map instead of separate materials for every level of IOR on a prop. Are we still waiting on OSL for this to be doable?
User avatar
Goldorak
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 2321
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:09 pm
Contact:

Polygons wrote:Raising this thread from the dead to add to the users requesting IOR maps. I can save considerable time by having an IOR map instead of separate materials for every level of IOR on a prop. Are we still waiting on OSL for this to be doable?
Yes
User avatar
abstrax
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 5506
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Polygons wrote:Raising this thread from the dead to add to the users requesting IOR maps. I can save considerable time by having an IOR map instead of separate materials for every level of IOR on a prop. Are we still waiting on OSL for this to be doable?
I will have a look at it the coming days to see how much work it is and what the performance impact. How would you define the index of refraction via a texture that usually has only values in the range [0 .. 1]. Would it make sense to make calculate the IOR via IOR = 1 + <IOR texture value>? I.e. without an additional multiply texture, the IOR value range would then be [1 .. 2]. Using a multiply texture you could extend the range if necessary.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
itsallgoode9
Licensed Customer
Posts: 893
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 9:04 am
Location: New York City
Contact:

abstrax wrote:
Polygons wrote:Raising this thread from the dead to add to the users requesting IOR maps. I can save considerable time by having an IOR map instead of separate materials for every level of IOR on a prop. Are we still waiting on OSL for this to be doable?
I will have a look at it the coming days to see how much work it is and what the performance impact. How would you define the index of refraction via a texture that usually has only values in the range [0 .. 1]. Would it make sense to make calculate the IOR via IOR = 1 + <IOR texture value>? I.e. without an additional multiply texture, the IOR value range would then be [1 .. 2]. Using a multiply texture you could extend the range if necessary.
hmmm, good point. Although multiply would work, i think that's not the easiest solution for the end user considering the user would have to do some extra math and pretty exact values in their texture to get it to work. LIke, say you want IOR values of 7, 4 and 1.33 in your texture...that would be kinda headache inducing to try and figure out the texture values to use for each number to make them all the correct value after a multiplier. Could there actually be a new IOR texture node that has multiple slots for alpha masks, and each slot has a value box beside it that you input what IOR corresponds for each mask? Or just use an HDR texture (although I don't find that completely ideal either because of size and the fact that your whole texture would be white).?

Do any other renders have an IOR map option? This is something i've always wanted but my other renderers have not had the option so I don't know how it's implemented elsewhere.
Intel i7-3930K, 64gb RAM, Asus X79 Deluxe mobo, 2x EVGA 780 6gb (for rendering), 1x PNY quaddro k4000 (for display)
Windows 8.1 x64, Maya 2014, Octane Render v2
User avatar
abstrax
OctaneRender Team
Posts: 5506
Joined: Tue May 18, 2010 11:01 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

itsallgoode9 wrote:
abstrax wrote:
Polygons wrote:Raising this thread from the dead to add to the users requesting IOR maps. I can save considerable time by having an IOR map instead of separate materials for every level of IOR on a prop. Are we still waiting on OSL for this to be doable?
I will have a look at it the coming days to see how much work it is and what the performance impact. How would you define the index of refraction via a texture that usually has only values in the range [0 .. 1]. Would it make sense to make calculate the IOR via IOR = 1 + <IOR texture value>? I.e. without an additional multiply texture, the IOR value range would then be [1 .. 2]. Using a multiply texture you could extend the range if necessary.
hmmm, good point. Although multiply would work, i think that's not the easiest solution for the end user considering the user would have to do some extra math and pretty exact values in their texture to get it to work. LIke, say you want IOR values of 7, 4 and 1.33 in your texture...that would be kinda headache inducing to try and figure out the texture values to use for each number to make them all the correct value after a multiplier. Could there actually be a new IOR texture node that has multiple slots for alpha masks, and each slot has a value box beside it that you input what IOR corresponds for each mask? Or just use an HDR texture (although I don't find that completely ideal either because of size and the fact that your whole texture would be white).?
If IOR would be a texture node, you could do this with a mix texture tree.
Do any other renders have an IOR map option? This is something i've always wanted but my other renderers have not had the option so I don't know how it's implemented elsewhere.
Don't know. C4D doesn't allow it as far as I know.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
fatrobotsneedlove
Licensed Customer
Posts: 161
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 7:06 am

itsallgoode9 wrote:Do any other renders have an IOR map option? This is something i've always wanted but my other renderers have not had the option so I don't know how it's implemented elsewhere.
Vray and Corona both get ior maps out of substance painter/ddo/megascans bridge.
4x 2080ti hybrids, 4x 980ti Hyrbids. C4D, Houdini.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”