PBR Material tutorial for Rhino 7 WIP

Hi.
Maybe I’m wrong, but why does the orientation of the texture change after having fillet an object.
The three objects are the same duplicate and then made the fillet.

Another question, why if I change the display mode from rendered to raytraced the bump go away?
In the two images there is the same material.

I did some experimenting. I see that the regular existing materials look fine:

I think this is becasue the default mapping type in Box Mapping WCS.

But the Physically Based materials set the default Mapping to Mapping Channel 1. ANd the results are less predictable. Yet, If I set mapping to Box WCS with physically based material, then the results are predictable:

I am still not exactly clear why the results you are getting are changing so much. Can you send us the model?

I would like to see the type of mapping is setup on the objects?

1 Like

Hi.
Thanks for the reply and clarifications.
I did some tests to try and understand the new features of Rhino 7 and I really like it.
The result looks great. :grinning:

You are doing a great job.

Test.zip (2.9 MB)

No more volunteering Kyle.

This should be done professionally, by someone who has the know-how, time, expertise and availability to do this work properly. This also includes getting the system’s features developed correctly so this work can be done right.

Having things done this way is not a freebie, it’s not a quick job, and it’s not cheap, but it’s usually a wise investment.

I suggest you guys ask @Holo if he’s available, and get him to quote you a project for it. His head is already in the space: PBR materials and WIP rendering feedback

You could do this yourself too of course, or you guys could do it together. He also seems to me the only one that has both experience and willingness to put up with Raytrace/Cycles. So McNeel could have a really good chance here to have experienced designer/s to design the system, and then work with their own experienced developers to develop those designs/requests.

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: It’s time you guys stop relying on amateur, improvisational, side-project, divided-attention, and volunteer work for Important parts of your own development. McNeel has a proven 20 year track record that this approach has continuously failed miserably, on repeated attempts, when it comes to rendering and visualization. And I see the same behaviors and approach still taking place.

Like Einstein once said: The definition of insanity for him is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results from it.

Best,

G

2 Likes

Yeah, that is interesting. Your model recreates the problem, that is great. Somethign is different with the PBR materials. I will report it.