[Poll] IGM support - post your opinion

[Whaat]

The new material format in Indigo 1.1.7 has wreaked havoc on my IGM loading code. This feature will take a lot of time and effort to update with the new material format and I want to know if you think it is worth it.

Remember: In the latest SkIndigo beta, you can now LINK an IGM material so that you can use any material from the material database. However, you would only be able to edit the material properties by editing the XML code (not using the Skindigo interface). Is this sufficient?

[cpfresh]

well whaat, i voted i can live without it just because i haven't had the need for it yet. of course, it is an awesome feature and maybe if it is something you'd prefer to put on the back burner so you can focus on other things such as shaders or what not, i'd say it's cool ... just as long as the igm loading eventually finds its way back into the script for those people who have grown to love it. whatever you decide, will be awesome to me.

[2kemon]

You've already given us sketchup users far more than I would ever dream of asking, whaat. It is a cool feature - no doubt - but you shouldn't feel the need to rush it in order to please us.

But, just in case you want something "usable", I would prefer it, f you'ld continue to improve the displacement configuration methods, so they will be as intuitive as possible.

In case it idn't come out, I'm just trying to say:
Your development of skindigo has been flawless, so far. So I trust you to choose which feature is most "urgent"

[crojack]

I'm not soo interested in it either. I also would rather see effective displacement integration into Skindigo rather than using IGM files.


and as always,
Thanks!

[Stinkie]

I say: don't worry about the IGM suport. Indigo's sliders provide us with quite enough control to make mats on the fly. (If it ain't broken, don't try to fix it. )

Simplified external referencing of texture maps would be great, though. (Does this make sense?) I'd even dare to call this more important than effective displacement.

Not that I want to tell you what you should or shouldn't do, but keep in mind: simple is best.

[OnoSendai]

I'm surprised that people don't assign a high priority to IGM import.
I guess you can just use the MatDB materials through an 'external link' material type in Sketchup, is that correct Whaat?

[Stinkie]

I'm surprised that people don't assign a high priority to IGM import.

That'd be because SkIndigo's mat editor very ease to use, I guess. Also, I think many SU users don't care about physical correctness all that much.

[Whaat]

I guess you can just use the MatDB materials through an 'external link' material type in Sketchup, is that correct Whaat?

Yeah, that's right. There is an externallly linked material type now. I will probably eventually update IGM import but it's a major pain and it's so boring to code...

[kwistenbiebel]

I personally like to have IGM support but I have the feeling other things are more urgent (like predictable displacement output + adapting light strength of emitters when used in combo with 'background color' environment light).

As it seems to be a lot of coding work for Whaat, I'll vote the second option.
Maybe full editable IGM can be part of Skindigo in a later phase.

On the other hand, now that material editing is going to be on a new level with the new 'shader' support, starting to build up your material from an existing .IGM would off course be very cool.

So let's say I am a little undecided here