OTOY Forums

radiance wrote: i'd like to add bump mapping first, then normal mapping.
i think the majority of users will use bump maps,
as they are easier to make and are omnipresent in texture DBs.
Radiance

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't normal maps are kind of useless in a memory-constrained raytracer like octane? Normally you'd use them to simplify the scene, however, in octane the normal map will, at 64bpp, probably take more memory than the actual geometry it's supposed to be simplifying while producing a poorer effect. Bump and displacement would be far more useful.

Yeah,

If you use a 32bpp per channel floating point normal map,
it will consume a lot of video memory, just like using an HDR map.

That's why i'm focusing on adding bump mapping first,
which will be much better as you only need to store 1 grayscale channel.

Radiance

radiance wrote:Yeah,

If you use a 32bpp per channel floating point normal map,
it will consume a lot of video memory, just like using an HDR map.
Radiance

I wonder who would go for such a combination ?
float point precision on an map that simply is an approximation of a 180 degree range surface orientation per pixel ? I hardly doubt some one will notice a smaller difference of 0.7 degree on a lit pixel.

I agree that it will be way more useful to actually utilize the highres geo as octane is a renderer not a realtime engine previewer. Yet many artist use nmaps as decent way for precisely lit surfaces in medium or long distance. So it would be a nice to have them, besides they share the same way of being calculated as bumpmaps anyway.

Opacity and Bump maps, great news !

For my own, I also like RGB Nor maps.

As said by someone, a button giving the ability of inverting the Opacity map would be useful.

wuah wuah, I am missing out on this train!, congrats for the opacity map and coating implementation.

quick question, would there be another slot of function for geometry clipping with image map function ?, I found this very useful in Vray. I use the clipping slot and I still have the opacity slot available for another type of transparancy map... I am currently using this two to create feathers in bird, I can also use this for leafs clipping.

anyways just my 2 cents

thanks for the update

-erwin

ROUBAL wrote: As said by someone, a button giving the ability of inverting the Opacity map would be useful.

An invert material node would be more flexible.

MDkai wrote: I wonder who would go for such a combination ?
float point precision on an map that simply is an approximation of a 180 degree range surface orientation per pixel ? I hardly doubt some one will notice a smaller difference of 0.7 degree on a lit pixel.

I think radiance stated somewhere that octane uses either 64, or 32 bits (I don't remember) per pixel internally for all color textures and 128 bit for the render target. So you might as well use it all.

Edit: Sorry for double post, I thought it would automatically append to the previous one.

MadMinstrel wrote:

ROUBAL wrote: As said by someone, a button giving the ability of inverting the Opacity map would be useful.

An invert material node would be more flexible.

Maybe, but as the need of inverted texture will appear when loading an image, a button in the image panel would be an easy way (I have always been clumsy with nodes )

I would quite like to have a way of mapping the output of a turbulence node to a colour ramp as well as things like invert nodes...

ROUBAL wrote:Maybe, but as the need of inverted texture will appear when loading an image, a button in the image panel would be an easy way (I have always been clumsy with nodes )

True, but then you couldn't invert the output of, say, a multiply node, or one of the parametric nodes. That said, an invert checkbox on the image node in addition to a normal invert node could be handy.

Generally, for the node system I wish there was more indication of what I'm actually plugging the nodes into - to see the tooltips you have to hit the tiny little triangle, which is tiresome when there are more nodes on the screen. I'd like an expanded node view, with input/output names visible at all times, and maybe texture previews. Also, while this isn't really a complaint, I find it strange that the geometry nodes' outputs don't connect to anything.