Shinneh and reflective, split the two please.

[AF]

Keep the existing behaviour and put a tag in that changes to using the seperate channels as requested. problem solved, tonnes of arguments made pointless, no backlog of textures to fix, everybody happy.

[smoth]

af, there is no arguement, just a discussion on how we want it to work out. The current behavior was based on my preference. however, I am willing to accept another preference as my statement is not gospel. The only "issue" if there was one was already resolved af.

ARGH: we already have a specular though. No point in discussing it further. The way normals work by generating false vectors for the lighting engine. Specular has little to do with the way normal mapping works. Specular works without normal mapping. Normal mapping is to place false light and shaddows immitating depth. However, unlike a painting, since they are based on the same method used to produce lighting on a vertex it will dynamically paint the shaddows based on relative lighting angle. Specular, which we already have and is now isolated only compliments bumpmapping, just as any other shader would.

*edit because the above was a speed post*
This post indirectly assists your request for lua normal mapping, giving you greater controll of specular lighting and now all you need is the normal mapping lua.

[jK]

Specular has little to do with the way normal mapping works. Specular works without normal mapping. Normal mapping is to place false light and shaddows immitating depth.

Normal mapping is per fragment diffuse+specular lighting.

Parallax Mapping & Relief Mapping give an illusion of depth and perspective (both need a heightmap!).

ps: none of those technics can simulate shadows (only highlights).

pps: like argh said lua materials allows it do seperate specular&reflection (this can be needed for some materials like plastic etc.), so there is no need for an engine change which would break compa. with all existing s3o models.

[smoth]

jk: a few things:
no compatibility is broken.

the only "change" if any is that we need to utilize 2 channels. One for specular and one for reflections. There is not loss of compatibility.

This is important because I do not want a 3rd map to be applied via lua for specular. In content one of the issues we now face is limited video memory to store all our textures. This is amplified by the tile based system spring uses for maps. So an extra image per model is a waste.

The content creators, I.E. the guys using it are excited about it. Spike was just upset because he felt I was making more work for him.

Having an image based specular setting is important, we only need the blue channel but for some things varied specular across the model is important. Think a persons face, you want higher specular on the eyes and lips but the rest of the skin has at best a lite sheen. So we do need precise control.

Many of us do not want a lua solution for something the engine does already. Sepperating it out gives us the ability to make full utilization for proper material simulation.

On normal mapping:

Shadows, produced by a proper lighting engine create the true depth of form that normal mapping was intended for. false geometric detail DOES come from paralax but normal mapping is used to create false lighting point in all uses that I have seen.

Specular components do help but are not necessary.

[smoth]

I just realized that we may be having a different conversation.

Are you saying that the normal mapping lua will not work with spring's specular shader?

I was just talking about the base engine and using it's features to better simulate a material system. The reason the split had to be requested is that specular and reflective systems needed to be sepperated for proper material designation. It will not break any models, at the worst, they will just have reflective maps.

[Argh]

Are you saying that the normal mapping lua will not work with spring's specular shader?

Yes. Read the code tutorials I posted, lol.

I was just talking about the base engine and using it's features to better simulate a material system.

That's always been possible, if you wanted to write a custom vertex shader to change the behavior for a custom build of Spring. I'm merely saying that if Trepan / jK come through, then this is a huge waste of people's time, and that I am not in favor of it.

[smoth]

waste of who's time? the patch took less then a minute. It is done. You don't have to use it and as you just said you won't be because you are going to go with a lua based shader.

[Neddie]

I think the patch offers something superior for my use as I get into modeling for the first time. I'm glad it has been committed.

[Kloot]

It hasn't been committed yet. That aside, if there are more
mod devs for whom the current shared-channel situation is
unsatisfactory and who do not want to wait for a Lua-based
"solution" to materialize than there are devs opposed to this
change, the patch goes in. If not, it doesn't.

(I have no objection to swapping the channels so specular is
read from green and reflection from blue, obviously.)

[smoth]

Cool, thanks kloot, so to make sure:
Green: specular
blue: reflective

What is the current status on dev approval or disapproval for this change? As soon as it gets an ok I will start utilizing it :). Let me know man, I really hope it goes in!

[Warlord Zsinj]

Whatever happens, I'd like to get a confirmation either way on the specifics so that I can start applying it to my existing and new textures.

Smoth, I vote you write a brief tutorial on how to best use reflectivity and specularity in different quantities in order to simulate different materials!

fun aside, I would like to see you write something like that

[smoth]

I can when I get time.

[Forboding Angel]

I doubt that my opinion counts for much here, but meh...

Personally I see it as both a good and bad thing. Rather good and annoying. Not so bad for me because I use very generic texturing and as such use only 1 image for all glow/reflective stuff.

Meh, commit it. It's annoying at the very least, but not a tradgedy.