Rough Specular reduces specularity amount?

[francomanko]

ignore this, my question was stupid

[FLP]

Testing the new Glossy Fresnel function of v3.5 BETA, it's awesome. I also noticed a glossy/roughness toggle. Chaos Group turning it up to 11 once more!

[thekafka]

Maya Love?

Glossy Fresnel plus a VrayGlossyMtl/VrayCoatMtl as Vlado described (I prefer layering in a blend material myself) would be massively helpful in the production I'm currently working on. I know this is the Max forum, but what is the timeline for implementing these for Maya?

Many Thanks,

Tim

[vlado]

It's coming but I don't have a precise date exactly. In a couple of weeks or so maybe.

Best regards,
Vlado

[Ihno]

So, unfortunately the reflection coat material didn't make it into the stable 3.5.
Still a very awesome release, though so dont get me wrong. But, how is it going?
Can we play with it soon?

[vlado]

We need to put out all the other fires first and I'll get back to it.

Best regards,
Vlado

[Ihno]

Hi, its me again, the annoying reflection coat material reminder guy.

[stevejjd]

As sharktacos pointed out, a simple texture map will not work accurately. I'm still trying to figure out what is the best thing to do in that case. I have two options:

a) Add an option to VRayMtl to ignore the diffuse and refractive layers and use the Fresnel transparency of the reflective layer as transparency for the whole material. In that case, if you put it as a coat in a VRayBlendMtl material with full blending, without any texture map, it will automatically blend things correctly.
b) Create a new VRayGlossyMtl material that only contains the reflective portion of a VRayMtl material with the Fresnel transparency as transparency for the whole material.

Which option do you prefer?

Best regards,
Vlado

vlado we need option B - I need this now

[stevejjd]

Please hurry with this....it's so important to me. How can I access the beta to test the coat materials?

vlado this His is the most important fire!

[davision]

Small nomenclature suggestion to Vlado -- don't call it VrayGlossyMtl (sounds too general). Call it VRayGlossyCoatMtl or VrayGlossyCoat (maybe mtl suffix shouldn't be used)

[Rens]

FWIW, I'd prefer an option in the VRayMtl, as the effect will be exactly the same as a separate material (the way I read it at least), should keep things a bit cleaner. Something called "Isolate reflection for layering". That would be neat.

[sharktacos]

FWIW, I'd prefer an option in the VRayMtl, as the effect will be exactly the same as a separate material (the way I read it at least), should keep things a bit cleaner. Something called "Isolate reflection for layering". That would be neat.

I think the idea is to have a way to do the "coat" that is made by using the additive mode in the blendMtl, except to do it without breaking the rules of PBR. Not sure how that would work if it was put into the VRayMtl. Let's say for example I want to combine the sss from an SSS2 material with the spec from a VrayMtl by combining them in a BlendMtl. Would that be possible as you are envisioning it?

[stevejjd]

Renderman has a great way of adding coats - come on VRay, catch up. I cant believe layering mutiple specs is broken in Vray

[Rens]

I think the idea is to have a way to do the "coat" that is made by using the additive mode in the blendMtl, except to do it without breaking the rules of PBR. Not sure how that would work if it was put into the VRayMtl. Let's say for example I want to combine the sss from an SSS2 material with the spec from a VrayMtl by combining them in a BlendMtl. Would that be possible as you are envisioning it?

Yes, from how I read it the reflection would be layered on top using the reflection filter as a mask for it, so it would darken the layer below correctly. Kind of like the 'over' mode in Nuke works.

But this brings up another point, what if you have multiple reflections you'd like layered on top of each other, you can't darken down the base diffuse layer with each additional reflection layer you have. Ideally, but correct me if I'm wrong, the math would be that you take the average of all the reflection layers, and then blend the base diffuse and that average together using the reflection filter. So with three layers (with Fresnel off) it would look like this:
(((Reflection1 + Reflection2 + Reflection3) / 3) * ReflectionFilter) + (Base * (1 - ReflectionFilter))

Which is a bit of a mess, because the three reflection layers all could have different glossiness and Fresnel settings, giving different ReflectionFilter curves.

Maybe there could be an option in the VRayBlendMtl for 'reflection layering', where it smartly layers all the reflections from the coats on top of the base correctly, reading the info from the VRayMtl coats. Or, a way to dynamically add reflection layers in the VRayMtl itself, which might be a UI nightmare as well.

[stevejjd]

I would like to use ALSurface plugged into the base of a blend material and then plug a new reflection material that has only the reflection parameters found in a vraymtl. You could layer many reflective layers and it would be energy conserving. You would not need a mask. You would get the nice glossy reflections with rough fresnel. It would be free from that funny bump map artifact. It would be easy to use and look great.

I believe this is a top priority for chaos group because the current workflow is broken and Hacky. Either use a falloff mask and the reflections look wrong or use additive to make it look correct but run the risk of making it non energy conserving.

i prefer additive mode but really wish that this gets solved asap.

Chaos group are extreemly smart - I think they can solve this easy. I like Vlado's idea of a reflection material that you can layer in the blend mtl