Been thinking of switching to glossiness (1 - roughness) - TopicsExpress



          

Been thinking of switching to glossiness (1 - roughness) convention of roughness. What do people think? Itd be a trivial code change. Of course I can offer an export option to simply invert the map for engines that use roughness instead of glossiness. Main reason Im thinking about doing it is that I think more often than not, and especially in a software that provides modeling, you want to start with rougher materials and paint the smooth, mirror-like areas on top instead of starting with something very smooth with sharp reflections and painting roughness on top. A very smooth, glossy material can be rather distracting during the modeling process, and with roughness, itd imply that we start with something glossy and paint roughness on top, and starting with something glossy is distracting for modeling. It basically boils down to this: With roughness: painting adds roughness, erasing adds glossiness. With glossiness: painting adds glossiness, erasing adds roughness. Generally we want to start with the paint tool rather than erase tool, so that would imply that for roughness, we start with something glossy (distracting for modeling), while for glossiness, we start with something rough (well-suited for modeling). Its why I think the glossiness convention would make more sense for my case.
Posted on: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 20:54:24 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015