Np,I am a little confused about roughness.Isn't that the same as a bump,normal or displacement map?
If u paint a roughness map in black and white say showing the details of a brick wall,should it be just noise in black and white,then the normal map should be clean or the roughness map can have the details of the bricks as well as the noise details on the bricks?
The roughness is exactly what it sounds like, how rough the surface is. White = super smooth, Black = very rough. What it results in is how narrow/wide the specular highlights and how sharp/blurry the reflections will turn out. Don't be afraid to actually use your hand and feel materials/surfaces
If you have a brick you'd probably want it to be noisy in the scale between near black/mid grey. But you'd have to test it out. My best advice is to spend some time observing and doing your research for the material you're doing. You want bricks? Go look at bricks, take photos. Google image search, Flickr, etc. Then start tweaking the texture levels until you get it right. The normal map should still have the noisy details as well.
Np,I am a little confused about roughness.Isn't that the same as a bump,normal or displacement map?
If u paint a roughness map in black and white say showing the details of a brick wall,should it be just noise in black and white,then the normal map should be clean or the roughness map can have the details of the bricks as well as the noise details on the bricks?
To add on to what Kodde said, have you use CryEngine or Marmoset? PBR renderers work similarly to their specular system. With both programs, the Gloss map affects the specular falloff(like spec power in UDK), but they also automatically introduce reflections. They do them a little differently, but both programs will increase the strength of a cubemap/screen-space reflections. I think understanding how a Gloss map works(EarthQuake wrote a really good tutorial on Marmoset's site for materials) would help, but keep in mind it'll be a little different for PBR.
The roughness is exactly what it sounds like, how rough the surface is. White = super smooth, Black = very rough. What it results in is how narrow/wide the specular highlights and how sharp/blurry the reflections will turn out. Don't be afraid to actually use your hand and feel materials/surfaces
If you have a brick you'd probably want it to be noisy in the scale between near black/mid grey. But you'd have to test it out. My best advice is to spend some time observing and doing your research for the material you're doing. You want bricks? Go look at bricks, take photos. Google image search, Flickr, etc. Then start tweaking the texture levels until you get it right. The normal map should still have the noisy details as well.
The roughness map is pretty much a gloss map right? Or is there some more technical stuff going on there that I'm missing?
EarthQuake> Nope, pretty much a gloss map afaik.
The substance map controls the specular color and fresnel term. This should be sampled from IOR based values if you're aiming at realism.
EarthQuake> Nope, pretty much a gloss map afaik.
The substance map controls the specular color and fresnel term. This should be sampled from IOR based values if you're aiming at realism.
Ok cool that's what I thought, and the substance map is similar to a specular map right? Where value controls specular reflection intensity and color controls, well color obviously?
Is Fresnel tied to substance value, or can you control it independently through the alpha? Or a fixed shader value?
As I've not written these exact inner algorithms in this shader I can't say for sure. But I'm not sure if the luminance of the substance texture actually alters the amount of specularity other than the color. The fresnel is derived from the luminance of the substance. Ie. brighter substance reflect in more angles, darker substance only reflect at glancing angles.
In the May 25th post on this site my colleague whom I've authored this shader together with talks about physically based lighting. If you're interested in more detail have a look.
xalener> I wish I had a solution for you I'm not certain that this is an issue with all ATI cards and CGFX shaders. None of my CGFX shaders work with ATI cards and I'm not sure why. I author my shaders in Mental Mill and do post tweaks in Notepad++. This issue probably some issue from the generated Mental Mill code, but I'm not sure where to start looking. Sorry. I get the feel that the general consensus if you ask people working with 3D is go for Nvidia for best compatibility.
From 0.3.6 to 0.3.7
-Uses Schlick's approximation of the Schmidt shadowing function instead of Kelleman for the geometry term.
-Max roughness 8192 -> 16384
Cheers passerby.
This last change has a quite noticeable effect on the specularity on rough areas at glancing angles. Was too much before, looks a whole lot better now.
Hey Kodde, so glad I found this. Exactly what I am looking for.
I can't get the shader to work however... I have SP 5 installed and DirectX11 set as rendering engine, but it can't run Viewport 2 (goes back to legacy as soon as I turn it on).
Warning: Viewport 2.0 is not supported by your current graphics configuration or graphics driver version.
The application is reverting to the legacy default viewport, please correct your graphics configuration or set the "Default viewport" preference to "Legacy Default Viewport" to prevent this error from recurring. //
Here at work I have NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 on my machine. Not really a top notch graphics card but is it true that it's simply too weak for this shader, or am I doing something wrong?
warby> Better late than never I suppose. Had missed your message. You are welcome
callebo> Why not try the newer ShaderFX version instead? Also a PBL shader for Maya, fairly identical and uses the newer real-time shader system in Maya. Check it out and let me know how it goes. http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2179773
I actually am trying to use the ShaderFX version. Although it doesn't really matter, since as soon as I open Maya (without loading the shader) I still can't render in viewport 2.0 which means it won't work, right?
Maybe haidda is correct. Need to research this a bit more... Any other way of getting PBR to work in maya? Alternatively, any good tools for previewing it? Is marmoset the way to go?
Edit: haidda is correct, directX 11 is not supported on GTX 260, however directX 10 is... Any way to load directX 10 as the rendering engine in Maya? Any plugin which isn't loaded that I'm missing?
callebo> Oh I see... Well if you can't use the viewport 2.0 then I think you need to rethink your plan of any rather useful real-time shader in Maya's viewport. Maybe time for a new graphics card? The 260 GTX was released exactly [size=+1]7[/size] years ago on this date :P
EDIT:
From what I can tell the 260 GTX is only DX10 compatible.
Replies
If u paint a roughness map in black and white say showing the details of a brick wall,should it be just noise in black and white,then the normal map should be clean or the roughness map can have the details of the bricks as well as the noise details on the bricks?
If you have a brick you'd probably want it to be noisy in the scale between near black/mid grey. But you'd have to test it out. My best advice is to spend some time observing and doing your research for the material you're doing. You want bricks? Go look at bricks, take photos. Google image search, Flickr, etc. Then start tweaking the texture levels until you get it right. The normal map should still have the noisy details as well.
To add on to what Kodde said, have you use CryEngine or Marmoset? PBR renderers work similarly to their specular system. With both programs, the Gloss map affects the specular falloff(like spec power in UDK), but they also automatically introduce reflections. They do them a little differently, but both programs will increase the strength of a cubemap/screen-space reflections. I think understanding how a Gloss map works(EarthQuake wrote a really good tutorial on Marmoset's site for materials) would help, but keep in mind it'll be a little different for PBR.
The roughness map is pretty much a gloss map right? Or is there some more technical stuff going on there that I'm missing?
The substance map controls the specular color and fresnel term. This should be sampled from IOR based values if you're aiming at realism.
Ok cool that's what I thought, and the substance map is similar to a specular map right? Where value controls specular reflection intensity and color controls, well color obviously?
Is Fresnel tied to substance value, or can you control it independently through the alpha? Or a fixed shader value?
http://www.defrostgames.com/2013/05/
throttlekitty> Thanks
From 0.3.6 to 0.3.7
-Uses Schlick's approximation of the Schmidt shadowing function instead of Kelleman for the geometry term.
-Max roughness 8192 -> 16384
As always, you can get the shader here:
http://www.kostas.se/?p=30
This last change has a quite noticeable effect on the specularity on rough areas at glancing angles. Was too much before, looks a whole lot better now.
I can't get the shader to work however... I have SP 5 installed and DirectX11 set as rendering engine, but it can't run Viewport 2 (goes back to legacy as soon as I turn it on).
Warning: Viewport 2.0 is not supported by your current graphics configuration or graphics driver version.
The application is reverting to the legacy default viewport, please correct your graphics configuration or set the "Default viewport" preference to "Legacy Default Viewport" to prevent this error from recurring. //
Here at work I have NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 on my machine. Not really a top notch graphics card but is it true that it's simply too weak for this shader, or am I doing something wrong?
Thanks
callebo> Why not try the newer ShaderFX version instead? Also a PBL shader for Maya, fairly identical and uses the newer real-time shader system in Maya. Check it out and let me know how it goes. http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2179773
I actually am trying to use the ShaderFX version. Although it doesn't really matter, since as soon as I open Maya (without loading the shader) I still can't render in viewport 2.0 which means it won't work, right?
Maybe haidda is correct. Need to research this a bit more... Any other way of getting PBR to work in maya? Alternatively, any good tools for previewing it? Is marmoset the way to go?
Edit: haidda is correct, directX 11 is not supported on GTX 260, however directX 10 is... Any way to load directX 10 as the rendering engine in Maya? Any plugin which isn't loaded that I'm missing?
EDIT:
From what I can tell the 260 GTX is only DX10 compatible.