Perform material processing after lod merging to fix share material comparison #45
Conversation
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
Contributor
|
What do you mean by bonkers? Removing specGloss can be an optional step in a consumer's workflow I don't think its prudent to remove this comparison. |
Contributor
Author
|
Well I have 3 LODs I want to merge but since the spec gloss in top level materials are removed the comparison fails |
added 2 commits
September 20, 2018 18:57
marpe
changed the title
robertos
reviewed
Sep 24, 2018
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The comparison of materials went bonkers when merging lods with the -share-materials flag when top level materials are converted to metal roughness. This compromise is still far from optimal, but I can't think of a better solution off the top of my head :/