[partial] Extend the dielectric_bsdf node to carry a priority value#2276
Closed
kprobinson wants to merge 7 commits intoAcademySoftwareFoundation:mainfrom
Closed
Conversation
kprobinson
changed the title
kprobinson
changed the title
priority value
kprobinson
changed the title
priority valuepriority value
Member
|
@kprobinson Let's merge this into your latest proposal PR at #2310, and we can focus our discussions there. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This would be one straightforward approach to adding nested dielectric priority to MaterialX. I've made a very small extension to the dielectric_bsdf nodedef, just to include the priority parameter. The default is zero, and I've noted that higher values mean greater precedence, following the semantics of OSL (as well as that of Renderman and Arnold). Then the priority value is passed down to the underlying OSL shader so it can be used.
I believe this would be the most focused way to maintain compatibility with existing MaterialX workflows.