Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - eric.lddv

Pages: [1]
seems like a fun contest,
I've a question though, regarding categories.

There are 2 categories, general and MDL, but I'm not really sure where to draw the line between both.

I guess something like a car paint shader would fit the MDL category, or something more shader oriented.
But, what would happen, for a ceramic or a marble for instance that could use some translucency and coating but are heavily pattern driven as well ?

like your video tutorial example, the fireclay tiles, would you consider this for the general or the MDL category ?

and in case we enter the general category, can we still benefit from a custom MDL ?

Is there any plan to release the materials included by default in Substance Painter within Substance Designer ?
There are a bunch of cool materials that would help improve the rather lacking preset library of SD. (some of the metals, the plastics, the uniform materials, etc.)

You can kind of hack it away by getting the sbsar, but releasing the .sbs would be super nice. For learning purpose as well as usability.

It is a simplification, I do agree, yet it does work in most cases ;)

as for the layered shader, the render times unfortunately tends to get pretty long if you rely on them too much :/
need to try again with the latest release though.

For the gamma curve, depends on your pipeline as well. At work we use the gamma nodes instead of the render settings (probably an remnant of MR and Vray workflow since we still use both of those as well)

Thanks for the precisions though, and the link is a goldmine  :D

I can't see your images so I don't know how you plugged it but :
To make it work, you should use the PBR (metal/roughness) materials from substance, and output all maps from it

if you have a non metallic material, it's easy for a quick shader :
diffuse color slot -> diffuse map (gamma corrected with a node)
diffuse weight at 1
specular weight at 1
specular color -> pure white  (gamma corrected with a node)
specular roughness -> roughness map
tick the fresnel box on and put the reflectance at normal value depending on your material (around 0.030~40)

If you have a pure metallic material
diffuse color slot >  black (you can also use a toned done diffuse map) (gamma corrected with a node)
diffuse weight at 1
specular weight at 1
specular color -> diffuse map (gamma corrected with a node)
roughness map -> specular roughness
tick the fresnel box off

with a mix of both metallic or non, i's a bit trickier

basically you need to tick fresnel on and use the metallic map to blend a value of 1 for metallic portions and your 0.035 value for the reflectance at normal value.
use a blend for the diffuse and specular color as well.

bump is as usual.

BTW, the shader computation being different in different renderers, except by building a custom realtime shader you won't have a 100% accurate preview though.

(note, those are for quick shaders that would work in most cases but not every cases and I wish arnold had a viable way to blend materials like Vray)

Substance DesignerSubstance Designer - Feature Requests - Re: Exposing Gradients
 on: September 19, 2014, 01:29:03 am 
Awesome, I'll give this a try as soon as I can.

As I work mainly offline, that seems like a perfect workaround for me, thanks a lot !  :D

EDIT : I actually tried it this morning before going to work, and that's exactly what I needed, thanks again.

Substance DesignerSubstance Designer - Feature Requests - Re: Exposing Gradients
 on: September 18, 2014, 05:02:50 pm 
Thanks for the answer ,

I'll try to find a slightly more efficient workaround than my multiple levels masks if I can.

I don't know if it's doable or not, but a node that would take 2 input, the grayscale image on one end and a color gradient on the other and do the same computation that what you have now could maybe do the trick.
Then we could plug a gradient as an input from outside of the main graph.

Substance DesignerSubstance Designer - Feature Requests - Exposing Gradients
 on: September 09, 2014, 12:02:30 pm 
Hi everyone.

I've been using Substance for a couple of weeks now, and so far so good, I'm starting to get a bit more pro-efficient with it.

There is one thing though that would make my life easier : being able to Expose gradients when exporting a substance.
I'm trying to build a library of fully procedural materials for myself, and the gradient feature is great to get basic colour pass out from the height map.
Unfortunately I've not managed to find a way to expose colour gradients for later modification.

I've hacked a way with levels and colour blends, but it doesn't give me as nice a result and it adds a bunch of unnecessary nodes to the graph.

Is there any technical limitations that stop us from exposing gradients ?


I've been looking a bit into Substance Designer lately.
Most of my work is related to prerendered workflow, on MentalRay, Vray or Arnold mostly.
Most of those renderer use a couple of main inputs (diffuse, reflection/specular, glossiness/roughnes, bump/normal, and fresnel/ior )

I understand that technically SD can output those maps without any trouble as long as I take care of making the proper adjustments in my substance.

But is there a way to actually preview a decently accurate output in the SD 3D viewer ?
Right now, the 2 main shaders Blinn or PBR don't allow me to preview anything remotely accurate.

Reading the forums and the documentation I understand there may be a way to build shading networks using GLSLFX shaders, but that seems overly technical for me.
Does anyone have a solution for a similar workflow ?

Pages: [1]