[sinatropus]

I was trying to do this very same thing with the brick procedural. Almost. See the last paragraph of my first post. viewtopic.php?f=140&t=44803
If we would get rid of the underlying mortar in red (even though it has 0 thickness) when the brick edges are soft, then that would actually work. But it's just that the mortar is showing through, because the brick texture can't overlap. That's why I asked for negative mortar thickness. Should have posted in the Wish List subforum.

[Forum Moderator]

Hi,
You can set Transition Sharpness U and V to 1. You won't see the mortar then.

Best,
Fernando

[sinatropus]

Thanks for the reply. I need the low sharpness to blend the textures seamlessly. Otherwise the transition will be sharp at the edges. Can't think of a situation where this would work. Hope that makes sense?
Or at least the possibility to use the same texture for the mortar without the mortar color which somehow hides the mortar texture entirely.

[sinatropus]

Looked more closely into TriPlanar and what I'm referring to with my previous posts is the texture randomness and non tiling what the OP pointed out as well, as it's part of the TriPlanar setup.
Anyways, maybe my wish would be more along the Mihai's line of thinking that we need something for the texture picker to hide the visible texture repetition, so some randomness in position and in rotation with smooth transition. Most of it is already existing in the Brick procedural. Or maybe a new Random Texture procedural, which wouldn't be very different from the Brick, except the no mortar, random offset also in other direction and rotation randomness in non 90 degree increments.

[Nasok]

By the way, I had a chance to use try-planar projections more frequently in Substance painter - Useful only for generic noise, grime, scratches and etc. Not really practical for any specific tasks. Like placing a logo in a specific spots, or other texturing routine.

Pros - Will greatly speed-up generic part of the shading (adding, random dust, scratches, grime, break up spec, and etc.)

Cons - You hardly can go specific. Ignores rotation (and any sort of world coordinates). Useless for animation (unless baked)

So bottom line - Tri-planar will never replace proper UV mapping and texturing workflow. but can speed up some generic routine where accuracy is not required.
Ideally it should be per-input based. So if you're inputing and a bitmap or procedural you can choose whether you wan tit to be mapped based on UV or Tri-planar.


Hope it helps

[seghier]

triplanar with redshift
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1tLjo20Dr4