Discussion in 'Modding' started by Tosch, Jul 24, 2014.
From 1998(kidding) due to gamma correction
Here is a little video to show what happens to your color in an hdr environment. There are 6 different tones of yellow (rgb 200,194,35 to rgb 250,244,35). At a certain angle they all look the same. That's why a lot of stuff looks like a comic book. You loose all details of the textures.
There is a difference between darken a texture and desaturate a texture.
RGB 220,214,35 reduce brightness in PS by 30 results in RGB 190,184,5
RGB 220,214,35 reduce saturation in PS by 30 results in RGB 192,187,62
HDR profile is "automation".
Sorry William for misuse your beautiful track. At least you can see I work on it.
When you're creating textures in Photoshop or GIMP or whatever, the colors that you're seeing are in gamma space--to match your monitor. When you save your texture in DDS, it's assumed that the textures are in gamma space as well (gamma space = sRGB). So 50% gray is actually 180, not 128. That was kind of a crap explanation, see below for better explanations.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fb9_KgCo0noxROKN4iT8ntTbx913e-t4Wc2nMRWPzNk/edit?usp=sharing - See: "Linear space and gamma", and again, towards the bottom in the Tips & Techniques section.
That's fine, good examples of textures where I hardly bothered to look at values in some places
Thanks for sticking with this, but I'm afraid it's all too much for me to get my old, knackered head around.
That video won't play for some reason.
Hey, so someone mentioned about Physically Based Shading, are we able with correct settings in shader achieve graphics like this
Actually...no, we're not. For the sole reason that we don't have convoluted environment maps (i.e. EM's with "roughness" built into them); heck, I don't even think we have mip-mapped EM's--afaik, anyway--which would provide a decent-enough estimate for 'rough EM's'.
I don't see anything we can't do really... I have seen environment mipmap bias in the shaders if I'm correct, roughness control we don't exactly have but in this example you don't exactly need it either. Nothing you see there is something we can't do, given we can do blurry envmaps, which I think is possible.
Sadly I was wrong about blurred envmaps
However, with just under two hours I got this result, obviously it desperately needs more work, but the trick is a good specular map in here (which it isn't right now )
We can only hope for more control with the way reflections are handled, might not be that much of a problem for the coders, priorities aside obviously. I know it's not the same result as above, but putting some proper time in, with the current way of things, we should get very close, when there is time for the roughness maps to be tied into reflections, it'll be no question anymore whether something like this is possible.
So yes, the notion that we can either control the roughness of the reflection by using a map, would be awesome, but not the holy grail (still have to put the time in). Simply controlling the mipmap value for the reflected map, would also be great to have, the latter being the simplest to add, but not the one you should want with ultimately.
Interesting, is more control over material reflectance planned as a feature or is it down to custom build/mod shaders?
@wgeuze - Nice quick wheel
No, you can have reflections on anything as-is. However, they're purely specular (i.e. mirror-like) reflections. In order to get something to look like the image you posted, you need 'glossy' reflections (i.e. "rough" reflections). In 'most' if not all physically-based rendering engines, the environment map is diffused / roughed-up / blurred and stored in the lower-level mips. Unfortunately, the environment maps (cubemaps) that are created dynamically in the sim do not even have mip-maps, which by themselves, in a pinch, can be used to approximate the 'roughed-up' (a.k.a. convolved/convoluted/whatever is grammatically correct) versions.
Yes, we very much need those, we're halfway there anyway!
Which method produces the best results? Darken the image or desaturate the image?
Anyone use Quixel tools?
How do we convert textures to HDR compatible ones?
I think we're at the point now where if it looks good in-game, that's all that matters. Most people should be seeing the same things these days. With the tonemapping being consistent, and not dependent on the automatic exposure, but on the time of day, you won't really get instances where something should look radically 'wrong'.
Just use Curves / adjustment layers to get it to look how you'd like.
Hope this helps!
This is a very basic tutorial, which is useful just to understand how's working.
You can bypass the second step, if you don't have any hard light and/or internal shadows in the picture (like a picture taken on overcast).
ORIGINAL PICTURE (CG TEXTURE)
View attachment 16747
REMOVING HARD LIGHTS ( you can bypass this one if you don't have this problem)
Copy main texture and Invert the Layer copy
View attachment 16748
Mix with original background using Soft Light. This will reduce the hard light and shadows inside the texture.
View attachment 16749
Open the Histogram and set channels to Luminance
View attachment 16750
Add a Adjustment Level on the top of the layers stack
Double click above the Level layer
Reduce the output level to reduce the “MEAN” value in the luminance histogram down to something around 70 and 90 (this depends on the physics
material involved). Never exceed that number, nor using anything above 100.
View attachment 16751
Open the Histogram and set channels to Colors
Add a Hue/Sat adjustment layer on the top of the layers stack
Tune down the Sat to remove just a bit of color if the main texture (background) can be considered correct in terms of saturation and exposure.
At this point you have a potential albedo maps to be tested ingame;
View attachment 16752
View attachment 16753
Thank you for the quick tuto.
Thanks for the info Tuttle, appreciate you taking the time.
Many thanks for the tutorial!! Now if you could pin it?
Separate names with a comma.