Indigo Renderer Forum

It has been a moment now, finally I'm able to announce a test release within two weeks !

Having recently (about one month ago) been more involved in developing MtI, it is finally raising again I hope. There's a lot planned, but focus for next test releases will be functionality. I feel like I would be much more efficient at working for an ehanced user experience but right now if it's working it's good enough The script editor may be flooded with debug outputs until I get a stable release, though at a certain point verbosity will become an option.

stay tuned !

I just finished:

MtI_MayaProcedurals.avi

This is a feature demo, demonstrating how Maya procedurals are exported to Indigo, in a scene preserving scheme.

I'm glad to announce that the workflow is totally transparent for the user

ps:

1: sorry for my (spoken) english
2: I'm stating that the oldest baking procedure is the most performing, that is false of course. I'm hoping for a 32bit output in a near future.
3: At the moment only diffuse albedo and bump are implemented since I was developing on diffuse only, expanding other materials should not be an issue.
4: emission and base_emission are now supported by Maya shaders (but not layers yet)
---
5: if the video is not streaming, download it (save to file). It's using the xvid codec, thanks for reporting any issue with sound and image.

I finally got around my head with the texture baking stuff, I'll post that test release soonish. No much hurry due to the lack of pressing demand I suppose... MtI now supports new shader definition, documentation will be sparse since things will visibly change with the future UI.

Meanwhile a few test pics, using (Maya) procedural textures only:

Cool stuff CTZn.
Your development is fast.

Nice
I had to download the vid to see it (sound worked, thought)...
Do you think, you could convert the "brownian noise" in Maya into an ISL "brownian Noise" (fbm) in Indigo?^^

Thank you suvakas... you know, I'm not starting from scratch, there were predecessors in coding MtI

Kram: probably the Indigo fbm and Maya (solid)Fractal (2d and 3d functions) textures have common parameters, but I don't know if the Maya noise functions are available for study in first instances (for a real matching preview using ISL). I'd better code the Indigo functions using python (and with dougal's work as a reference I suppose )

But in first instance I must know a bit of ISL, and that's not the case yet

Thanks for your posts guys, I was expecting some Maya user here but certainly not no one, ty !!!

Technical reasons are delaying the integration of the Maya team within Glare Technologies; we are looking cojointly to their resolution, even more actively for a few days (I am opening a parenthesis to affirm that these reasons are strictly independent from the respective wills of Glare and MtI team to work together). At this time it appears that the main actor is... time. You will be informed as the situation evolves.

Meanwhile, MtI has had a few improvements, notably:

• - a front-end wich is bringing to you the controls you were lacking for meshes, materials, instances and exporter options
  
  - Light layers support for both the involved Maya materials and indigoShader plugin
  
  - Non-RGB spectrums are now described in a separate connectable node for clarity
  
  - Blend materials can now be chained; blending one blend material with another blend material at the same level will be allowed soon
  
  - Texture baking was extended to shading utilities, as the "Test Texture" function allows
  
  - MtI is stable again, compared with the early modifications I brought to the 1.0.9_3 release from Doug

I am not the kind of guy logging the changes at home, that's what I get off the top of my head right now. I will take better habits in the future, and a documentation is finally planned

- How about an update, dude !?

Well, after I released a certain amount of minor, if not mediocre packages, I thought I would change the way I'm doing things... no, I did not become perfectionist, not quite, but I want to make sure I'm breaking mediocrity at least, and this would take some volunteers to stress what we got now. That could be you !

By applying for private testing, you will be helping for a faster public release of a better MtI !!!

I know I am talking only to a few, I am not expecting much buzz from this announce. I figured that if you answered to the august survey you might want to apply for testing MtI, either by posting here or through a private message. We will decide together if MtI is good enough for a public release.

I'll take care of updating the forum more

Very nice work CTZn.... you may want to edit the thread title

Aw, don't push me, do I look like I've been running recently ?

Hehe, most likely the next thread will be for a public beta release, I'm still shy about the idea but that would certainly be the way to go for a faster feedback.

I hope to pull the trig soon

Sent you a pm

I got your message stromberg, thank you.

Ben just had the latest MtI beta for evaluation, I'm waiting for his signal so we can proceed with the next steps !

Ok

So what does this mean, are you going to send me a pm when the next steps are... or whats happening on the next step?
Just a bit confused here

Again, Glare Technologies is owning the elements for an answer, not me. Hence the confusion I think.

You can imagine that I'm impatient myself, I am sorry that you are asking now but we can righteously expect these elements to arrise very soon.

I've been waiting for months now, please do bear the fact with me.

Ah.. ok.
If you have been waiting for months i can understand you are impatient, i will keep in touch then to hear how it goes, you can expect that i bother you with some pm's now and then

And here is one more that can bear with us

Thank you stromberg, much appreciated.

I'm not wanting to hold MtI back, i only wish for a context wich would allow that release, while preserving the peace of my mind.

Say, saturday's advanced night is adding to the confusion

See you soon, right here !