Blendigo 2.2.8

[Headroom]

The new interface does not provide access to the A, B and C parameters anymore. That is somewhat limiting!

If, for example, a scene is created in an earlier version and has the Exponent defined as A=0, B=9500, C=500 then the new Blendigo seems to allow access only to the A value (for Exposure) and changing it would screw things up a bit. That's just one example.

[Headroom]

And still now way to change the backbody temperature of an emitter!
Which I reported to the initial thread announcing a new Blendigo interface. Did anyone in charge read that ?

I guess I still have to use 2.2.1 in parallel to fix some of the stuff that I cant do with the "improved" Blendigo

[Godzilla]

Am I the only person who finds it a little odd how the + and - buttons are set up?


Currently, you press a button designated as " - " to expand a menu, and a button designated " + " to minimize a menu. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

[psor]

I do agree with you on that. It should be changed.



take care
psor

[Jambert]

Am I the only person who finds it a little odd how the + and - buttons are set up?


Currently, you press a button designated as " - " to expand a menu, and a button designated " + " to minimize a menu. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I do agree too

Maybe A, B, C value could be rename too, doesn't mean anything for much people...

[Headroom]

the A,B and C parameters are replaced with something more explanatory:

in the Material Editor:

Color (if type "Texture" is selected)
Brightness=A
Contrast=B
Saturation=C

Bump
Distance=A
no access to B (default is set to 0.01)
no access to C (default is set to 0)

Exponent
Intensity=A
no access to B (default is set to 10000)
no access to C (default is set to 1.0)

Displace
Distance=B
no access to A (default is set to 0.01)
no access to C (defaiult is set to 0)

I am running Blendigo 2.2.8 in parallel with the old 2.2.1. I just opened a fresh blender file, edited the values in 2.2.8 and looked where they were showing up in 2.2.1. As explained in my earlier post I am no friend of limitations for simplicities sake. A better explanation/documentation of these parameters for the above "slots" as for example given by WytRaven in this thread http://www.indigorenderer.com/forum/vie ... f=7&t=3064 would be much more helpful!

[WytRaven]

the A,B and C parameters are replaced with something more explanatory:

in the Material Editor:

Color (if type "Texture" is selected)
Brightness=A
Contrast=B
Saturation=C

Bump
Distance=A
no access to B (default is set to 0.01)
no access to C (default is set to 0)

Exponent
Intensity=A
no access to B (default is set to 10000)
no access to C (default is set to 1.0)

Displace
Distance=B
no access to A (default is set to 0.01)
no access to C (defaiult is set to 0)

I am running Blendigo 2.2.8 in parallel with the old 2.2.1. I just opened a fresh blender file, edited the values in 2.2.8 and looked where they were showing up in 2.2.1. As explained in my earlier post I am no friend of limitations for simplicities sake. A better explanation/documentation of these parameters for the above "slots" as for example given by WytRaven in this thread http://www.indigorenderer.com/forum/vie ... f=7&t=3064 would be much more helpful!

Couldn't disagree more. Leave as is and read the bloody manual.

[StompinTom]

Couldn't disagree more. Leave as is and read the bloody manual.

Agreed. I know they're a bit confusing at first, but it goes with learning the tool. Maybe if they were labeled 'intensity (a)', 'contrast (b)', etc. but never disable access to them! I use the b and c values for bump, exponent and displacement all the time.

[OnoSendai]

Well, as in the Indigo material editor, I would recommend that 'b' is given the less technical name 'scale' and 'c' is 'offset'.

[dougal2]

Great! Thanks!

May I ask about the hybrid rendering method? Will it stay disabled in Blendigo options?

The button for this mode appears to have been overlooked, despite the rest of the code for it being present. I've added the button and it'll appear in the next release.

[dakiru]

Thanks a lot. And one more thing is not there are blackbody emitter settings

[dougal2]

A few things from quick play

Motion Blur is still screwed up - something went wrong between the last version of Smartdens, which did motion blur just fine, to Benn' version. That is still not working properly

I think I see the issue - as far as I can see it affects camera MB only? do you agree?

Here's a demonstration of the problem, it's evident if you render all frames in the animation:

[dougal2]

Camera motion blur is fixed:

[Doug Armand]

A few things from quick play

Motion Blur is still screwed up - something went wrong between the last version of Smartdens, which did motion blur just fine, to Benn' version. That is still not working properly

I think I see the issue - as far as I can see it affects camera MB only? do you agree?

Here's a demonstration of the problem, it's evident if you render all frames in the animation:

Not sure what the cause is - only its effect. I only render single frames.
Below are 2 versions of same frame. Only difference is Blendigo version. There is both camera motion and object motion, ie wheels rotating.

In Smartdens version both motion blurs seem to render correctly. In 2.2.8... well I don't know if wheels are rotating correctly as I can't see then!

The camera is pretty much tracking the first car btw. This was all explained in earlier posts when Benn was 'updating' Blendigo .

Blendigo 2.2.21

carsceneblendigo2221.JPG (98.91 KiB) Viewed 3435 times

Blendigo 2.2.28

carsceneblendigo2228.JPG (109.35 KiB) Viewed 3432 times

I know it wont go down well but smartdens version worked ok - all it really needed was to have the render buttons placed at the top

[dougal2]

@Doug

The problem was that the camera MB start key-frame was always frame 1 rather than the current frame - so your broken render shows a blur covering time=0 to time=(current frame+exposure duration) instead of time=(current frame) to time=(current frame + exposure duration).
The result of this is that for any frame other than the first, the MB effect is too much by a factor of (current frame number).

Anyway, it should now be fixed