dandelO's device not working

Started by mogn, April 26, 2009, 08:21:50 am

Previous topic - Next topic

mogn

I like the multipage view of  the assign shader, but assign an input tab of a shader to the output of an internal shader to that input tab, is not possible.  >:(

jo

Hi,

It's working for me in the following situation:

I created an Add scalar at the top level of the network view.
I created a Constant scalar with a value of 1 inside the Water group.
I connected the output of the Constant scalar to Input 1 of the Add scalar using the Assign shader menu and the Add scalar output a value of 1, as expected.

I think that's the same situation as you're describing.

Regards,

Jo

mogn

Not quite. In both the beta version and tg2 I create an "Add scalar" in the internal of this I create a "Constant scalar"

In the beta version when I assign a shader to input 2 of the "add scalar" I'am offered the following:

    "/Background/Background shader"
    "/Atmosphere 01"
    "/Base colours"
    "/Heightfield shader 01"
    "/Compute Terrain"
    "/Add scalar 01"
    "/Add scalar 01/Constant scalar 01"

In the golden release I'am offered:

    Add scalar 01        (here I would have expected:  Add scalar 01 => Constant scalar 01)
    Atmosphere 01
    Background => Background shader
    Base colours
    Compute Terrain
    Heightfield shader 01

dandelO

April 26, 2009, 03:23:01 pm #3 Last Edit: April 26, 2009, 03:26:02 pm by dandelO
This is true, there are really significantly less options when using the assign shader function in the final. I'm not best pleased with this. I never noticed until now, though, thanks, mogn. :(

In all the TP's and betas we had the option to assign any node in the scene to any input of another node(with the exception of the actual 'input' and 'child layer' inputs, and I couldn't convince Matt to make this possible either, he likes the main input left where it is) via the assign context click, regardless whether it was inside another node or not. In the final, however I'm limited only to nodes that appear in the main parent network view, and even then, not all of them. This is a massive step backwards, in my opinion.
Hopefully this is just an oversight on PS' behalf that will be corrected soon. Please.

dandelO

April 26, 2009, 03:59:31 pm #4 Last Edit: April 26, 2009, 04:04:25 pm by dandelO
Neither is it possible anymore to assign any shader with the '...' boxes in the settings dialogues(now a '+' with a wee arrow on the corner).

More and more I'm finding that the best version of TG2 is the last public beta. Yes, the new final releases have a few new bells and whistles but, ultimately, this isn't any improvement on functionality and freedom, at least for me. I don't particularly need a scale tool, or an exposure slider. The only good thing I can pinpoint about the final is the inclusion of the parts shader for .obj's, and even this hasn't worked out the way I'd hoped, for instance, you cannot disable single 'parts' from the renderer, try it, you'll be left with the blacked out mesh of the model.

I'm somewhat dissapointed with this big release v2 'final'... I also understand, though, that PS have been more or less FORCED into this release by the impatient, whining hounds on the forums etc. and can't possibly be expected to have everything covered for the release. This said, I also understand the 'whining hounds' points of view; 'When am I gonna get what I paid for, you said this date, then you said that date, etc.'

The whole thing is one big public relations nightmare, and, with not just a little 'spanner in the works' feel with all the recent Xfrog 'announcements'. Bloody farcical!

I'm happy to carry on using the beta, it's a far more functional and altogether better program to use. No cigar, PS.

Oshyan

I can understand you being frustrated about some possibly reduced options, but I think it's a bit much to say that the beta is a "far more functional and altogether better program to use". It's the same program, with mostly small changes for the final. The vast majority of functionality remains the same, or is improved. We are happy to work on anything that may have been a step back in the updates, but I must say it's kind of demotivating to hear you say something like that. I hope you'll reconsider and take a more positive approach, letting us know what needs improvement, and helping us to improve the product by giving feedback on the latest versions.

- Oshyan

jo

Hi,

I will look into this problem. It's essentially an oversight not a deliberate removal of capability.

dandelo, please look at the change log. The measuring tools ( which may not be desirable to you but which were widely requested ) and the exposure slider are just a couple of items amongst dozens and dozens of improvements. The reason you haven't seen a dramatic increase in new functionality etc. was because the feature set was frozen and most of the work concentrated on bug fixing and performance and stability improvement. A number of them are things you only would have noticed before because they caused a crash.

The parts shader stuff was a very late addition. We felt it was important to get the capability in place to use more than 16 textures on models. It basically works, but we would expect there may be issues with it needing to be resolved in further updates.

Regards,

Jo

mogn

I agree with dandelO, that it is a major step back. That means that to design any thing usefull, you have to use two application,
the beta and the tg2 release. The layout of multi page shader list is much better in tg2, and shaders designed in the beta, also works
in beta2.

jo

Hi mogn,

Quote from: mogn on April 26, 2009, 11:17:31 pm
I agree with dandelO, that it is a major step back. That means that to design any thing usefull, you have to use two application,
the beta and the tg2 release. The layout of multi page shader list is much better in tg2, and shaders designed in the beta, also works
in beta2.


As I said, we will get this fixed.

In the meantime I think there is a pretty simple workaround. If you want to create nodes inside something, create them inside a group and not another sort of node. You can still have nodes on the outside, grouped with the group so they move together. I'm pretty sure this will work because I have a very complex project from bigben which uses this approach and it seems to be working fine to me. If you try the example I gave above, using a group to contain a node, you should see that it works.

Regards,

Jo

mogn

Another good thing in tg2, (which I have requested a long time ago) is that names in the internal network, can be the same as outside names.
I.e. the names are protected by the path to the nodes.  8)

jo

Hi dandelO,

Quote from: dandelO on April 26, 2009, 03:59:31 pm
The only good thing I can pinpoint about the final is the inclusion of the parts shader for .obj's, and even this hasn't worked out the way I'd hoped, for instance, you cannot disable single 'parts' from the renderer, try it, you'll be left with the blacked out mesh of the model.


What would you expect to happen? If you disable the texture/shader for part of a model no texture is applied. If you want something else, hook something else up to it.

Regards,

Jo

dandelO

Planetside:

I may have been a little brash yesterday in my posts and for this I apologise.
I think I just feel a little dissapointed with small additions like the measuring tool, compass etc. only to find that one of the major strengths of TG - the freedom of the node network - appeared to have been so 'hobbled' for the final release and maybe my wording was a little blunt. I know I couldn't have done any better in getting the product out there, and I don't want to demotivate any of you, the job you're doing is no small task and to keep everyone happy is kind of an impossibility, especially with the constant hounding by disgruntled customers.

To hear that the problem with something so simple as assigning node inputs is most likely an oversight that will be rectified is what I'd hoped would be the case. It just felt like another step backwards and, that I haven't posted much in the forums about TG-Final, given the sheer volume of pissing and moaning about dates/plants/pricing/etc... it kind of all flooded out. I'm good at putting feet in my mouth at times.

I do understand the problems you guys have been up against and can appreciate the workload has been a major struggle. When I read back on my posts it does strike me as pretty rude, especially the 'no cigar' part. :-[

Jo:

What I mean about the parts shader, and this is probably not the way the shader has been designed(but in my opinion should be ;)), is that in most app's that load and render models, each respective 'part' can be easily hidden/disabled from rendering by a simple checkbox. e.g. if I load a tree and want to only render branches, no leaves, most applications have the simple functionality to disable the parts individually from the model, each part behaves as an object in itself...
[attachimg=#]
Like so.
Again, this may not be the design of the parts shader and can be worked around with individual shader opacity values etc. It's just kind of dissapointing, even when I can import more than 16 textures now.

Sorry to sound like a whiner, I've just been reasonably quiet on the whole thing these past weeks and felt kind of bumped with a prog' with seemingly less functionality than we were given before... Size-10 oral extraction in progress. :-[

mogn

Quote from: mogn on April 27, 2009, 03:15:55 am
Another good thing in tg2, (which I have requested a long time ago) is that names in the internal network, can be the same as outside names.
I.e. the names are protected by the path to the nodes.  8)


Unfortunate I was wrong, the internal names are changed. Insert a tgc, with internal net work. Rename it.
Then insert the same tgc. All the internal names are appenden with a _1, even it it not needed, and makes
the network difficult to read. >:(

Oshyan

It will unfortunately take a bit of work to redo the internals of TG2 to use unique numerical identifiers instead of names. This is what's necessary to allow nodes with identical names.

- Oshyan

mogn

Wrong, I want the same names, not modified names. Identical names should not be a problem.
E.g what is the problem differencing between  "shader1/shadernamedwhat" and "shader2/shadernamedwhat"

The following shows the internal network of point_1_1_1_1, all the 4 shaders are copies of "point"