Hi,
Is it possible to get illumination mask like the “Shadow Mask” option that already exists.
We understand that the light linker can be used to achieve the same functionality, but to use the light linker with HDAs it is necessary to promote some elements of the “Render” tab in all objects in that HDA, also with the light linker you can’t create dynamic rules (eg: get all objects called box*).
Best,
David.
I’ve made some initial implementation, but still not sure how to correctly blend this with light linker…
Let’s say you have 3 boxes with * light mask, and 3 lights one of those with one of those boxes in illumination mask.
So, should all the boxes still receive light from all 3 lights (as lightmask defines)?
Or only one box should receive light from light with illumination mask and all other stay unlit (this will ignore light linker lightmask entrily)?
And this makes all other cases even worse in some linking combinations…
Thanks for looking into this @bdancer .
I think in our case, since we try to stay away from the light linker as it has its limitation, I would never use both together if both were available and would instead use the illumination mask as it provides more flexibility (ability to use wildcards) and ease of use (due to the hda issue I mention before).
But I don’t think they need to be blended, one could just overrite the other, and would definitly go for your second option:
Or only one box should receive light from light with illumination mask and all other stay unlit (this will ignore light linker lightmask entrily)?
But as you mentioned, this makes things even worse with linking.
Best,
David.
Lightmask would be great indeed! I’m with David on the blending/combination - so for an object to be lit, it needs to be in the illumationsmask of the light AND the light needs to be in the lightmask of the object. Or am I missing something?
It’ll be available in the next nightly build; will see how it’ll work, for now if illumination mask exists for any light “light linker” will be ignored (except for shadow linking).
Amaizing 
Will test tomorrow then, but would be cool to have also feedback from more users and how this impacts them, thanks.
Best,
David.
awesome, that was fast!
Hi again @bdancer
Found what seems to be a small bug in this new feature.
By default, lights are all working, but the moment I add any illumination mask to one of the lights, all other lights stop affecting the scene:
In this example, there are 3 lights, each colored different, and only the rectagular lights with “*” in the illumination mask is affection the scene, if I remove that “*” from the rectangle light, all lights work again.
for now if illumination mask exists for any light “light linker” will be ignored
This behavior seems to be intentional, so when 1 illumination mask is present in the scene, all lights need illumination mask, that’s not the best solution I guess. Can we just have an “*” in all lights illumination mask as default? This would for sure mess up with people that are currently using the light linker. But would make more sense as it would mimic how the “Shadow Mask” works. Alternatively can you make it so that only the light that has the illumination mask settings gets the “light linker” ignored?
Best,
David.
@bdancer
Forgot to add that, besides the issue mentioned before, it works great, was exactly what we wanted and it makes much more sense to use illumination masks to set light contribuition.
Also, many thanks for the light lister changes
Best,
David.
> Alternatively can you make it so that only the light that has the illumination mask settings gets the “light linker” ignored?
No, it’s either “illum mask” or “light linker”, but I guess I could make it “*” as the default (but that again if all “*” light linker is used, if one of them is not “*” then “illum mask” is used).
This would be the best solution by far, like I said before, with this working, we see no reason to use the Light Linker (having the lights exclusions/inclusions in the objects makes no sense). This also aligns better with what the “shadow mask” is doing, it would look odd to have a light with default settings have “*” at the Shadow Mask" and an empty field at “Illumination Mask”.
Best,
David.
Hi again,
I noticed you made the default of the “illumination mask” a “*” in the latest nightlies, that’s great, thanks @bdancer . Other users should be aware of this change, as it will make any scenes that use the light linker not work correctly, but it’s an improvement in workflow.
But when testing it to check if could be deployed I noticed there is still an issue when using the “illumination mask”. When setting more thatn one “illumination mask” things kind of go crazy, as they stop working as expected, see the following example.
Using just 1 mask, all good here.
Using 2 masks, incorrect result.
Using 3 maks, incorrect result.
Scene attached.
Best,
David.
illuminationMask_v001.rar (37.2 KB)
Hi again,
Looks like the issue is fixed, but there was not notification here @bdancer .
There’s still a small annoyance, the illumination mask is not getting updated correctly during IPR render, is this a limitation or something that could be fixed?
Best,
David.
> is this a limitation or something that could be fixed?
Should work in the next nightly.
Awesome, thanks 
And by the way, this is nice:
Best,
David.
