for v-ray to be a true mass succes

[craiggorton]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Maybe next to the transparency slider have an icon that shows a sphere being obscured as you slide.
And a reflection highlight that adjusts in real time, too.

But this could all be condensed into a material preview that updates in real time. Isn't there a way to get a faster preview?

Everything on the same page is what I was thinking- and the page is very small for a simple diffuse material, and gets larger as you start adding layers, bitmaps, etc.

0-100 is always better than 0-255. Even worse is using a color to adjust transparency. "How transparent is it? It's red transparent." That just doesn't make sense. 78%- okay, I understand.

Always take out variables that are not affected by changing inputs. I don't know what the IOR within a fresnel reflection does, anyway. (If it does something, fine, but if it doesn't affect anything, get rid of it.)

Glad to see that the UI is getting attention. Can I ask about how many seats of VfR are out there? I see 11,000 members of this forum. I was impressed when we hit 1000.

Cheers,
Craig

[ALTO]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Before any kind of graphic approach is better to define how the "layered shader" should work.
I mean at the moment in Max or Maya, Vray works different than in Rhino or SketchUp, this is strange for some reason and i hope to see something more similar between all applications.

Maybe having Diffuse and Reflection always linked is more physically correct than the actual layer structure, Refraction could stay separated like now. Emissive layer is totally different from others, so if selected it could replace other properties, someting like this:

Layer 01
-Emissive

Layer 02
-Basic (Diffuse+Reflection)
-Refraction (if needed)

Layer 03
.......

(hope this make sense!) :


Then a guideline for a nice Material Editor could be:

-Reduce number of windows (maybe only 1 with tabs)
-Compact Dimensions (smaller fonts can help to reduce windows size)
-Add Material Browser and Texture Browser
-Replace simple updown controls with spinners
-Add Drag&Drop (and or Copy/Paste) with reference option for ALL values
-Add possibility to choose from different preview scenes (more fast preview if possible)
-Better texture editor with bigger image preview and more options
-Add a material wizard (and/or some presets materials)

About sliders i think they are nice for optimized settings but not for all values, you already know my opinion: LINK
The advanced interface with all parameters editable and the basic interface with some hidden values and some useful sliders, if this is possible i think could be really great!


PS: if this is an official discussion about the MatEd UI, i think it should be better to invite here also SketchUp users...

[Micha_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

I installed Maxwell and must say, the material editor looks to scientific for me. I like the layer structure of VfR. It's logical for me. My suggestion is, to place the emitter behind the reflection layer. For example good for glass bulbs like at the current ASGvis webpage. I'm not a friend of sliders, because much UI space is needed. I would careful implement sliders.

The guideline looks good. "Reduce number of windows" - most important for textured fresnel reflection.

[dalomar_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

@Craig
-Realtime update while a slider is adjusted...maybe we can find a way to fit that in on some important ones. The thing about that is that it takes up space and a label works just as good

-We are looking into making the material preview a progressive render, which would continually update changes and continually refine itself. This should allow us to get passed the hurdle of the manual update

-Discarding seemingly meaningless settings is not a bad idea, it will clear up some space and confusion (Refraction IOR within Fresnel reflections thats different then refraction IOR?!?...everytime I have to explain it to someone I confuse myself)


@Alto
In preparation for all of the UI work that we are trying to do I've gone back and read through that thread several more times. Chances are pretty good that we are going to try to implement some sort of predefined UI components for things like wax, glass, plastic and whatnot.

As far as the layered shader idea, I'm not really sure thats going to be the main direction we are going to take. We are going to allow for a flexible layer order (ie diffuse above reflection). Having certain layers linked to others doesn't really help the situation. Like if your trying to do a decal on top of a reflection layer (like here) having the diffuse and reflection layers linked is not going to help that task (maybe I'm miss understanding the layer system that your suggesting??). Either way, once the layer order issue is freed up, the I think the whole issue with layers will be fine. We may add a special material in which whole materials could be layered, but thats really far down the road.

Most of your guidelines is where we are looking to go.

PS: if this is an official discussion about the MatEd UI, i think it should be better to invite here also SketchUp users... Wink

SketchUp users are welcome to join the discussion (I guess we can move the thread to a "neutral location" if deemed necessary ). However, right now vfSU has a few different issues that vfR...Mainly how to handle the creation mapping channels/UV information (see thread here). Besides, I don't think that anything that we're discussing wouldn't be welcomed by the SketchUp users, but if they want to chime in they are welcome to do so.


@Micha
I agree that the Maxwell editor looks scientific (all that IOR stuff seems worthless, give a value and call it a day). As far as I'm concerned (as I said above)once we free up the layer order, I think the layer thing will be come a non-issue. After that the only thing that needs to be resolved (layer-wise) is the transparency handling. We are going to try to implement the sliders in a number of places where they will be much more useful then a color or a number. We'll keep space considerations in mind, and try to keep the total real estate used to a minimum. In total, it hopefully won't be any bigger than our current UI, but much clearer and easier/more efficient to use. The number of windows will most certainly be reduced.

[merlik585]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

it would also be nice if each layer could have is own settings,like bump map,displacement,emissive,(just like transparency)those are global and sometimes I would really have use for multiple bump map.

Renee

[dalomar_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

We could implement a per layer bump, similar to transparency (and I believe that request was made sometime back...I liked it then, I like it now). However, displacement can't be implemented on a per layer basis because it modifies the geometry as a whole. If you really wanted each layer to be emissive, the you could trick it to due so by using the Acolor procedural and increase the texture multiplier. I'm not sure why you'd need emissiveness for an individual layer, but if Joe can get it in there then okay.

[Travis Serio_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Hey I like a slider =) they are simple, and I my friends, am a simple man.

I also like what Micha said about being compact. I think that once you fully understand VFR you tend to like the interface a lot. It really is simplified with no clutter, but really depends on the user understanding the layer hierarchical system as well as the color picker system. When you are first learning VFR it really looks confusing (yes color pickers for transparency I mean you!). However, once you stumble over that first stepping stone (and how couldn't you now that the kick ass manual is out) it seems all to clear and it's no trouble at all.

I suppose there is something to be said for power usage verses beginner usage. You won't make everyone happy that is for sure. If anything, make the tedious jobs easier, such as controlling the environment bg image and gi in a linked fashion if you wanted to. To me things like this speed the process up and get me out of the interface and back to rendering. Ya know I also like the way vray/max has the little presets for the vis opts. That's pretty handy if you ask me. What ever you guys decide, I'll be happy. ;D

[Markvanhandel]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

I was running a new user through the material editor and realized that for those of us transitioning from Flamingo Tabbing reflection and diffuse layers, etc. would make a lot of sense. As you add layers you get more tabs. But that may only be for those of us with that background.

As for mapping, if it was a checkbox that grayed out the feature it was overriding and then showed a pulldown of the mapping options below it could eliminate the many windows. I have posted a mock-up of this whole thing.

Obviously there are problems with this as it could get messy as maps are added. But I figured I'd chime in.


Shot at 2007-07-11

[ALTO]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Well thinking about what i wrote, i've changed something....

Basically what i mean is that layer are not single properties but complete shaders with all parameters (maps too) so in one layer you could have:

Diffuse=1 | Reflective=0 | Refractive=0
or
Diffuse=1 | Reflective=1 | Refractive=0
or
Diffuse=0 | Reflective=1 | Refractive=1
or
Emissive=1 (this remove other properties)
etc...

So a multilayered material could be:
- LAYER 1 Diffuse=0 | Reflective=1 | Refractive=1
- LAYER 2 Emissive=1
- LAYER 3 Diffuse=1 | Reflective=1 | Refractive=0

In this way we can use multi-bump, decals is not a problem (with layer transparency) and also emitter under Reflective layer should work.

....mmmh this is exactly how Material Editor works in Maxwell and Fry (and also similar to the VrayBlendMtl in VfMax), so i've reinveted nothing :P

In the current version you can have 2 reflective layers and 2 diffuse layers in one material but they are not linked so the second diffuse is not affected by any of other parameters (this doesn't make sense for me)


PS: i'm sorry for my poor english... :-[

[ALTO]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

I've spent some time to create something that explain better "my idea":

Material Editor:
Basically it works like in Maxwell or Fry but with tabs for different layers.
Some interesting things could be:
-the dropdown contol under material preview is used to choose what material needs to be edited from a list of scene materials (something like a browser list)
-the Presets dropdown in parameters tab contains different presets materials like velvet, glass, carpaint etc.. (with specified UI) or custom settings for editing in "advanced mode"
-the expandible checkboxes in layers tab are very useful to add/remove quickly shader properties
-each layer contains maps list like in 3dsMax








Well i've just copied the VfMax options so i'm not sure if all of them fit well in VfR; and of course to reduce the UI size each material tab should have a scrollbar.


Material Browser:
There are 2 type of browser in the same window, one is an explorer like version, the other one is the browser for the materials embedded with the scene.



Texture Editor window could be done similar, with editor tab and browser tab; also if MatEdit and TextEdit could stay open at the same time, it would be very nice!

Comments are very welcome!



PS: Thanks to Markvanhandel for tabs and checkboxes ideas!

[Micha_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Looks quite good. And the RAL materials are a good idea too.

[dalomar_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Alto,

I like that setup, and I think allot of other advanced users would like it as well. However, I need to ask one question... If I had no V-Ray/Renderer experience, would that setup be any easier to use? I don't really think the answer to that would be yes. Although it adds alot of interesting functionality, is more organized, and has workflow improvements, it doesn't actually look any more intuitive then the material setup we have now. One of the biggest issues that we have right now is that users who are very new to v-ray and rendering in general (in SketchUp it is very new, and Rhino users are not heavy into rendering) are very confused when they look at our product. Its hard for new users to understand what's going on based on how we have our program setup. Numbers are typically harder for people to understand because in the real world a reflection parameter is not a number, but more/less blurry. Colors for values such as reflection are even harder to understand because the color represents a number, which means to different modes of thinking. Not only that, but there is still almost no hierarchy to that UI. I still don't know what is the most important setting when I look at those. And why do I need all that BRDF info right at the top of the panel...its confusing.

All I'm saying is that we are rethinking our UI from the ground up. There are alot of great things about the UI that you made up (I think the parameters page is a very good idea) and I get what your saying about the Layer structures now. The thing is that cutting and pasting from different UI's is only going to get us so far. It still falls into the same (major) pitfalls that we have now. The settings aren't intuitive and there is almost no hierarchy for users to understand which are the most important settings for my material.

I'm not trying to knock the effort and thought that you put into making that, and its really good to see it. As I said, I really like it and would enjoy working with it, its just that we need to find a solution that makes v-ray easier and intuitive for everyone, whether they be new users or seasoned veterans. It is very much appreciated that you've take the time to put something like that together. It shows us that our users are enthusiastic about our product, not only where it is, but where it can go.

[ALTO]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

Well to answer your main question i quote myself here:

-the Presets dropdown in parameters tab contains different presets materials like velvet, glass, carpaint etc.. (with specified UI) or custom settings for editing in "advanced mode"

And to explain better also this concept some other images:







So beginner users don't need to go into "strange" parameters to setup advanced materials, all can be done in the first tab.

But when you say:

...its just that we need to find a solution that makes v-ray easier and intuitive for everyone..

i'm not sure i can agree with you, Vray is a professional render engine not a toy, it's almost impossible to use professional softwares without studying them for some hours/days also there are a lots of Rhino user (like me) that they know the VfMax interface, rebuild a totally different UI couldn't be the right choice...


...my 0.02$

[ALTO]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

...Not only that, but there is still almost no hierarchy to that UI. I still don't know what is the most important setting when I look at those. And why do I need all that BRDF info right at the top of the panel...its confusing.

... The settings aren't intuitive and there is almost no hierarchy for users to understand which are the most important settings for my material...

About hierarchy problem you're talking, i don't think so, first because this shader structure, Diffuse-Reflection-Refraction, is common to ALL render engine it's a Standard order, not invented by me.
Also i think it's more logical than the "physical order" used by VfR, to explain better this, look at this questions scheme:

What kind of shader do you need? (Lambert|Gouraud|Phong|Blinn|Oren-Nayar|Ward)
What's the main color? (diffuse properties)
Does it have reflection? (reflection propetries)
It is transparent? (refractive propetries)

Do you think these questions are in a wrong order?

[Micha_cg]

Re: for v-ray to be a true mass succes

i'm not sure i can agree with you, Vray is a professional render engine not a toy, it's almost impossible to use professional softwares without studying them for some hours/days also there are a lots of Rhino user (like me) that they know the VfMax interface, rebuild a totally different UI couldn't be the right choice...

Good point, I hope, we don't lost functionality, because this is a big advantage of VfR too. For example bunkspeed hypershot: it's extrem easy, but limited for one use - HDRI environments and medium speed only. It could be nice to optimize the workflow of the professional, complex Vray. But Vray user could get predefined setups and special environments (for example a full HDRI texture based environment, with simple enable/disable shadows/reflections/texture of the ground plane and 100% match of ground and env).

ALTO, I' m not sure I understand, when a slider must be. One time it's a glossiness and the next time not. For example at the glass material, should not be there reflection and refraction glossiness slider? I like the glossiness slider "matte ... satin ... high". Could be nice to enable an automatic mode for the subdivs, like we talk about it some weeks befor. So, the user could use the slider only.

I like the physical order of layers with the freedom to change the order. For example a glossy plastic with a diffuse dirt layer at the top. This is not so easy to setup with the current VfR.