cyclesbakind-uvs #40253

New Issue

michael williamson · 2014-05-19T00:39:20+02:00

michael williamson commented

2014-05-19 00:39:20 +02:00

System Information
Operating system and graphics card
osx 10.8.5
intel hd graphics 4000 512mb

Blender Version
Broken: 38a430c

Short description of error
baking to active image node doesn't respect the vector socket...

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error

add two uv sets to the default cube unwrap or project uvs differently on each
change render engine to cycles.

in uv /image editor create a new image.

in node editor create an image node and pick the new image

add a uv node set to first uv channel
connect output to input of image node

in mesh properties make sure the second channel is set to active
in node editor ensure the new image node is selected
use cycles bake in the render properties tab to bake to image

despite the first UV channel being connected to the node input socket the render uvs of the second uv channel (which have the render icon in the mesh properties) are used for the bake.

this may be "correct" but is the opposite of expected behaviour for teh node editor so I'm filing this bug report..

**System Information** Operating system and graphics card osx 10.8.5 intel hd graphics 4000 512mb **Blender Version** Broken: 38a430c **Short description of error** baking to active image node doesn't respect the vector socket... **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** add two uv sets to the default cube unwrap or project uvs differently on each change render engine to cycles. in uv /image editor create a new image. in node editor create an image node and pick the new image add a uv node set to first uv channel connect output to input of image node in mesh properties make sure the second channel is set to active in node editor ensure the new image node is selected use cycles bake in the render properties tab to bake to image despite the first UV channel being connected to the node input socket the render uvs of the second uv channel (which have the render icon in the mesh properties) are used for the bake. this may be "correct" but is the opposite of expected behaviour for teh node editor so I'm filing this bug report..

michael williamson commented

2014-05-19 00:39:20 +02:00

Changed status to: 'Open'

michael williamson commented

2014-05-19 00:39:20 +02:00

Added subscriber: @michaelw

michalis zissiou commented

2014-05-19 01:42:45 +02:00

Added subscriber: @michaliszissiou

michalis zissiou commented

2014-05-19 01:42:45 +02:00

You should add a blend file
Anyway, I confirm this.
It doesn't make any sense.
This"temporary" UI solution goes more and more inconsistent.

You should add a blend file Anyway, I confirm this. It doesn't make any sense. This"temporary" UI solution goes more and more inconsistent.

Lukas Tönne commented

2014-05-19 08:48:45 +02:00

Added subscriber: @LukasTonne

Lukas Tönne commented

2014-05-19 08:48:45 +02:00

test file test_01.blend
@michaelw: it helps us when you upload such a test file right away when you can, just drag it onto the comment/bug report window.

About the bug: this might be a bit cumbersome, but it's not a bug. Nodes are a lot more ambiguous than the classic buttons in properties panels, so it's usually better to use those properties for the active element in a list, rather than the active node (which can be a lot harder to find).

I would rather like to see the Bake operator/panel moved closer to the UV maps buttons (mesh properties tab). It may be a render feature technically, but in terms of data it is very closely connected to the UV maps, unlike the rest of the render buttons which don't relate to any specific piece of scene/object data.

In addition to that it could be a nice usability feature to add this operator also to the node properties for UV Map nodes. This should be in the extended sidebar buttons rather than on the node itself. That way you can use baking directly from the node editor too without having to leave context.

test file [test_01.blend](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F89400/test_01.blend) @michaelw: it helps us when you upload such a test file right away when you can, just drag it onto the comment/bug report window. About the bug: this might be a bit cumbersome, but it's not a bug. Nodes are a lot more ambiguous than the classic buttons in properties panels, so it's usually better to use those properties for the active element in a list, rather than the active node (which can be a lot harder to find). I would rather like to see the `Bake` operator/panel moved closer to the UV maps buttons (mesh properties tab). It may be a render feature technically, but in terms of data it is very closely connected to the UV maps, unlike the rest of the render buttons which don't relate to any specific piece of scene/object data. In *addition* to that it could be a nice usability feature to add this operator also to the node properties for UV Map nodes. This should be in the extended sidebar buttons rather than on the node itself. That way you can use baking directly from the node editor too without having to leave context.

Dalai Felinto was assigned by Lukas Tönne

2014-05-19 08:49:16 +02:00

michael williamson commented

2014-05-19 09:39:23 +02:00

Quite! why use the active node at all? it seems a little redundant...

the ui problem is thorny though... being a combination of object, mesh, uv and material stuff... and of course render settings...

wouldn't it make sense for the bake to just generate an image and to have a picker so the user can choose which uv set to use and a filepath? why create an empty image first? why the node shenanigans?

Quite! why use the active node at all? it seems a little redundant... the ui problem is thorny though... being a combination of object, mesh, uv and material stuff... and of course render settings... wouldn't it make sense for the bake to just generate an image and to have a picker so the user can choose which uv set to use and a filepath? why create an empty image first? why the node shenanigans?

Warren Bahler commented

2014-05-21 02:21:20 +02:00

Added subscriber: @WarrenBahler

Warren Bahler commented

2014-05-21 02:21:20 +02:00

if it's worth anything, I'd agree, just make a dropdown for at least the UV map selection- its too ambiguous working with active uv maps, and selected nodes.

Dalai Felinto commented

2014-05-21 14:10:37 +02:00

In addition to that it could be a nice usability feature to add this operator also to the node properties for UV Map nodes. This should be in the extended sidebar buttons rather than on the node itself. That way you can use baking directly from the node editor too without having to leave context.

@LukasTonne That doesn't make much sense as it is, since bake at the moment is per object, and more than one object can have the same UV Map node.

> In addition to that it could be a nice usability feature to add this operator also to the node properties for UV Map nodes. This should be in the extended sidebar buttons rather than on the node itself. That way you can use baking directly from the node editor too without having to leave context. @LukasTonne That doesn't make much sense as it is, since bake at the moment is per object, and more than one object can have the same UV Map node.

Lukas Tönne commented

2014-05-21 14:32:25 +02:00

Added subscriber: @dfelinto

Lukas Tönne commented

2014-05-21 14:32:25 +02:00

@dfelinto: Ah yes, i didn't consider that. It should then use the active object, which admittedly is another implicit external context access, but imho more transparent than using the active uv map slot. Was just a suggestion anyway, it's not so crucial.

Dalai Felinto commented

2014-05-21 20:19:13 +02:00

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Archived'

Dalai Felinto closed this issue

2014-05-21 20:19:13 +02:00

Dalai Felinto commented

2014-05-21 20:19:13 +02:00

As stated by @LukasTonne this is not a but. closing the report. UI design discussions can be done elsewhere.
If this is to be considered as a wrong behaviour it should be filed for the projection painting and viewport as well, since they all follow the same design.

As stated by @LukasTonne this is not a but. closing the report. UI design discussions can be done elsewhere. If this is to be considered as a wrong behaviour it should be filed for the projection painting and viewport as well, since they all follow the same design.

Sign in to join this conversation.

No Label

Download

What's New

Blender Studio

Manual

Developers Blog

Documentation

Benchmark

Blender Conference

Development Fund

One-time Donations

cyclesbakind-uvs #40253