Page 1 of 1

Transmittance w/ an nd above 1.0?

Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:54 pm
by brodie_geers
I'm using some dosch trees which use clip maps for the leaves. I'd like to make the leaves a bit glossier by raising the nd above 1.0. However, whenever I do that the clipmap doesn't seem to work right. In the Default preview, for example, instead of showing an invisible ball w/ a visible leaf mapped onto it, it shows a sort of glossy translucent ball with a visible leaf mapped onto it.

Is there a way to have a properly clipped material w/ an nd above 1.0?

-Brodie

Re: Transmittance w/ an nd above 1.0?

Posted: Mon Jun 22, 2009 7:34 pm
by numerobis
Instead of the transmittance map you can use weightmaps - here is a tutorial:

http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/view ... 2&start=15

to control the reflectance you can add a third layer using the same weightmap like the lambertian layer

edit: just saw that the tutorial uses a clipmap too, not what i meant. look for the banana material on this side - but without sss!

Re: Transmittance w/ an nd above 1.0?

Posted: Wed Jun 24, 2009 1:27 am
by Bubbaloo
Yes, you should use weighted layers instead of a single clipped layer.

Re: Transmittance w/ an nd above 1.0?

Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:15 am
by brodie_geers
Yeah that does seem to be working. Thanks for the help. I'm still not super happy w/ the result but it's better. I think SSS would be nice but my understanding is that SSS won't work right w/ single plane textures and maybe there's some issue w/ clip/weight maps as well. I think the other part of it is Dosch's problem. Sometimes the big planes of clip mapped leaves look like big planes of clip mapped leaves.

Re: Transmittance w/ an nd above 1.0?

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:43 am
by Richard
Mate - Brian (Bubbaloo) has posted some great results using sss / clips on leaves but mindful this is on VERY thin geo with thickness which would likely pull SU to a crawl.

I must say I've looked at the Dosch trees and they don't really cut the mustard on the quality side!!!

I'm just waiting a bit to see if MR - V2 has the option to produce SSS results from single plane geo before I finalise what might be a host of trees that will run well with SU! I've been working out a workflow that does a great job! Though mapping of the trunks and branches is a no go in SU so need to look at an alternative for that!

I'll keep you posted!