- User Since
- Sep 8 2008, 7:02 PM (549 w, 4 d)
Sun, Mar 17
Line segments and Curve segments don't support Subsurface scattering while Triangles does.
Fri, Mar 15
You have different Subdivision count in render vs viewport. Set the same subdivisions for both render and viewport and they will look the same.
Thu, Mar 14
It was that all along? You guys are lifesavers! ❤
Mon, Mar 11
Sun, Mar 10
Thank you for the file. After seeing your model now I can definitely find it on mine, but to a lesser extent. It seems those flipped normal are areas where the combined normals go above 90 degrees away from the camera. I imported the model to unreal and it definitely happens there too, but less glossy, more similar to the rest of the material. It would be nice for Blender to do it that way but I'm not sure the developers would consider that a bug instead of a known Eevee limitation.
I can't replicate it with my own models and normal maps, some of which are directX, but all of them look perfect. That's why we need an example blend file with textures attached, to discard factors like the gamma and the kind of normal texture itself, the UV map used as tangent in the Normal map node for model with multiple UV maps, to help you if it's not a bug but just the setup, and ultimately to know if it's just a bug on that happens with one particular gpu driver or a more general bug.
Please provide a blend file with an example of the bug. The nodes are collapsed in that screenshot so it's hard to guess the settings of the math node and the normal map node
Thu, Mar 7
The default shadow settings are more on the side of speed than precision. Use ESM shadows with more exponent or use VSM shadows with high bitdepth and 0 bias, make sure walls are thick (double sided), and adjust the Clip Start of the shadows. You should not get any light leaks with this.
Tue, Mar 5
Thu, Feb 28
Fri, Feb 22
I love this! A couple of thoughts:
Feb 20 2019
The noise is smaller than the size of a pixel in the cubemap, and thus the small noise disappears in the downscale process while the few ones that appear look big because that's how big the pixels are. It's like downsampling a picture of stars in photoshop, that's what happens, and no filtering algorithm would solve that 100%. It's definitely NOT procedural textures changing scale, because then it would change scale even with big textures like in the imaged I used above
What you see is a combination of a moire effect, due to small scale of the texture and the low cubemap resolution. Another way of putting it, the texture is so small than when it's captured on the cubemap filtered at a lower res, it just happens to look like a large scale version of the same texture, an optical illusion. But if you use any other procedural texture, or the texture at a larger size, you see that lowres cubemaps don't change their scale. Like in this image with the lowest cubemap resolution possible.
Feb 18 2019
Feb 16 2019
I know there are now some simple expressions that run without python and are considered safe so they don't require permission. Maybe try writting a more complex expression to eventually trigger the warning
Feb 15 2019
Feb 10 2019
It seems Separate Albedo gets forced on during renders. If you turn on Separate Albedo, the viewport and render look the same, but I think the fact that the render doesn't respect Separate Albedo being off is a bug
Feb 9 2019
Count me as one of said users, but there's no hurry ☺ I even made a thread in DevTalk describing a really neat use case that my friend uses it for. Now that Local Cameras are back, this would be the other last feature needed
Feb 8 2019
Thank you! I love it 😁
Feb 4 2019
Yeah, this is due to the textures being 3D and the coordinates used. This doesn't happen with UV coordinates which are 2D or with Generated coordinates which stick to the surface, it's only when using Position or Object coordinates and the likes, the newly elevated surfaces intersect with the texture at a different point in space. I reccomend you using UV or Generated in the meantime.
Feb 2 2019
Yeah, this seems like a bug, although specific to your graphics. Let's hope Clement sees this
I can't replicate it. Transparent clip shadows work fine for me, although at first it appeared mostly opaque because the texture is too bright above the clip threshold. By dissapear you mean the shadow becomes fully opaque or fully transparent?
Ideally Matcaps would be tagged with different color managements for each
Feb 1 2019
Dupliframes is a real loss here, the array modifier and curves modifier don't cut it
Jan 29 2019
Jan 27 2019
Yeah, boolean doesn't work well with edges and faces that have 0 distance and are parallel. It's a known limitation
There's a big difference between times reported and actual times. It renders slower than it says. For example, after the first frame, not counting build time since im rendering a cube, the time reported goes down, but it it's actually the same. Regardless, these are the times on my machine when rendering, but I think they are slower
I see no bug. It works the same, except for the fact that it creates Ngons instead of Triangulation. Hide the cilinder or apply the modifier and you'll see that it works fine. Maybe you got confused because you are in Wireframe without Xray mode and you couldn't see the interior, press Alt+Z to toggle Xray. Also, that's a very old version of blender to compare it to. 2.79's boolean works much in the same way as in 2.8, with Ngons instead of triangulation
I can confirm too. win 10 64, nvidia 1060 6gb
Jan 26 2019
Alright, so after some trial and error, I found a workaround, I still ask for this to be considered a bug though.
the problem that op points is that is not the default. not that it can't be done
Jan 25 2019
That also is an option that was also there in 2.79 but now is a default. It's called Release Confirms and it's in Preferences>Input>Devices>Mouse
Not a bug. Those are the limitations of real time z depth shadows, since they are not raytraced. Very common in videogames.
Jan 24 2019
Not a lie nor lost feature. Blender 2.8 still has Right click select, which you can change in the preferences of 2.8, and you don't have to deal with that "bug", you can select anything inside the circle of the gizmo with no problem. And Left click select existed in 2.79 as well, which you can change, again, in the user preferences of 2.79 and youll find a similar issue.
Jan 23 2019
Another update. Turns out that plugging a texture into the Subsurface input of Principled BSDF throws another wrench into the mix. Not subsurface radius, which i know is not supported, but Subsurface. Meanwhile, using Subsurface just with a value doesn't break either the diffuse or the subsurface, at least during viewport.... sometimes... and using Separate Albedo in the render properties also can make things worse... sometimes...Let me explain:
I connected nothing in the second socket as a "simplest blend file" example. But in practice I was using it with emmissive shaders, and there it's a deal breaker
Jan 22 2019
Jan 20 2019
Jan 19 2019
Now that the precision of the grid has been increased, can we have the Clip Start distance in all the Workspaces be 0.01? https://developer.blender.org/rBb5bc2158a07140e5463e209839bcf36d2ce2cddc
Jan 18 2019
Jan 16 2019
Jan 10 2019
I believe this used to work fine a couple of 2.8 versions back. idk what happened, or why it works on lookdev but not on solid
Jan 9 2019
Jan 8 2019
Screen space effects like Screen space reflections and refractions, ambient occlusion and contact shadows, only work with what's available on screen and fade on the edges. They're not real raytraced effects. You can increase the virtual border during render by going to Render properties > Film > Overscan. Only works during render though
Jan 5 2019
I like Alt 3. My main problem Current and Alt 1, and to an extent with all of them, is that the thin parts don't look realistic. Maybe an actual simulation with flip fluids would be nice
The shader does work, it has an Eevee fallback, maybe not the intended fallback but I do use it with hair quite often
Jan 2 2019
can you provide a blend file with the hdr packed in it?
Dec 30 2018
I hope they fix this. The Bump node basically causes bumps at half the resolution of the render. My understanding is that it uses the difference of value between adjacent pixels and that's why it's half res. It was also like that in 2.7's material viewport, but I think Eevee needs it if it's going to be used in final production. Maybe internally sampling the bump texture at double the render resolution, or with a jittered approach for each sample. I had to render at 4k so it's less noticeable 😂, luckily Eevee is fast. Btw, actual normal textures with a Normal map node, like tangent space normals, look fine and fullres.
Dec 29 2018
Dec 19 2018
Can I provide a blend file on their behalf?
Dec 18 2018
Dec 17 2018
Dec 13 2018
Your gif doesn't convey well. Please attach a blend file with the simplest example. Is it possible you are referring to this?
It's a know limitation of the way cubemaps are blurred, more visible if the cubemap has lots of small bright lights
You can try increasing the filter quality or changing the the cubemap resolution so it's less visible
It reminds me to some months back when matcaps, the HSV color picker, and the lookdev hdrs were all filmic. Now it's better for the matcaps and lookdev, but the color picker is hard wired to corrected filmic, regardless of the color management settings. There should be more options for the color picker, depending if you want the HSL and HEX to be corrected for srgb, filmic, your scene color management settings, etc
Dec 12 2018
Dec 10 2018
I'm going to side with Julien. Being able to switch between UV editing with or without images, Image viewing with or without UV's, and Painting with or without UV's, is more easy as one editor. There are enough permutations and combinations that separating it into two editors will make some of those permutations not possible unless they are added as redundant features from one editor to the other, which is more work for developers. Also, the bespoke UV editing mode was a great adition for handling tools and the toolbar, I don't see how that isn't enough for things like Object mode uv editing
Automerge is under Mesh options, both in the tool properties, and the topbar to the right
Even after changing the viewport steps to 9 you don't see it happening on the viewport?
I can confirm and I have a gtx 1060 6gb as well (blender-2.80.0-git.e79bb957fc3-windows64)
Dec 9 2018
Dec 8 2018
Will you consider adding unlinked collections management to this design document? I made a small proposal to not use another outliner for orphan collections. I hope you check it out https://blender.community/c/rightclickselect/ltcbbc/
Dec 7 2018
Sadly, that's a known limitation, sorry. Parallel faces with 0 distance on the same space don't work, and some volume needs to overla. Here is an exagerated example, but you can separate faces and overlap the volumes just a very very little ammount like this and it would still work. I heard Howard Trickey might work on improving booleans in the future :)
I have a 4k monitor as well and don't have that problem. But it does behave differently to 2.7, which I understand it can be seen as a bug but it's probably a design decision. In wireframe mode, you can basically end up selecting an object by the faces even though the faces are not visible, which doesn't happen in 2.7 where it always selects the closest wire to the mouse. I don't quite understand the heuristic but it hasn't been that much of a problem for me, and to be fair, 2.8's wireframe has options to perceive the faces like the Xray slider in the shading popover.
Yeah, I agree with you
Dec 5 2018
Suggestion. Overlap threshold in Boolean modifiers to 0, and merge threshold for the Intersect(Boolean) command in edit mode to 0 as well. For the longest time I thought the boolean algorithm wasn't good enough for some cases, producing non manifold meshes from my perfectly manifold ones, but it turns out that the merge threshold is what messes it up for me most of the time.
It works fine for me. Consider providing a blend file with an example of this. Also, check that the Overlap threshold in the Boolean modifier is set to 0.0 exactly, since merging vertices can give problems
Yes, this is another report of the same bug https://developer.blender.org/T58726
Dec 4 2018
I have the same problem, on Windows10 64, Nvidia 1060, driver 417.01
Dec 3 2018
Also, the Cut tool and Annotation tool themselves don't allow for connecting nodes by the socket, or dragging nodes, forcing you to go back to box selection
Dec 2 2018
I noticed that some N gons go really slow. Please attach an example file
Dec 1 2018
Attach the blend. Also remember to turn on your GPU devices on Edit> Preferences> System
You are using Blender Internal, which doesn't exist in 2.8 anymore. Only Cycles and Eevee. Once you manually convert your materials in 2.7 from Blender Internal to Cycles, you can open it in 2.8 and see the shading and textures in the Lookdev shading
Nov 30 2018
Using the menu is not for corners, but for vertical or horizontal edges. And you don't have to make a gesture with the mouse, the arrow will appear. Joining is also limited to same size adjacent areas
Using Ctrl+G and the Collection panel in the Object properties to create collections, creates Unlinked collections, meaning that they haven't been linked to the Scene collection. I agree that the interface here should be improved, but it's not really a bug. Use Mkey on the viewport instead (the old key to move to layers) or the New collection button on the Outliner's header. In the meantime, you can use a second outliner and change it to Orphan data to see the unlinked collections and objects, and drag them from one outliner to the other