You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Crest BIRP does not support additional lights due to bugs in the pipeline and performance concerns. Please see #382 and #383 for more details.
Early on when I was evaluating which to use this, LUX, various other time savers, Lighting was one of the deal breakers (for right or wrong). At some point I evaluated Aura 2 and modified the Ocean.shader to have custom pass that adds volumetric lighting which at the time was a compromise for no light component support at all, other than directional lighting. This came at the cost of performance obviously but it was a desired trade off, something the user can turn off in settings for lower end machines, now I am no longer using Aura 2 due to unrelated reasons / requirements, but it proved to me it was possible to have a good lighting feature for this. At the time I also saw the 2 experimental branches that added lighting and I understood the concerns. But why not have this as a toggleable feature? Experimental? Is there still a show stopping bug? There must be some sort of workaround because it seems to work fluidly for similar projects some examples that do not meet my needs for other reasons but prove to me it is an obtainable goal: https://youtu.be/uiEgukNGxrA (point-light) https://youtu.be/1zx2hFxH7BI (spot-lights)
There are some other examples for URP, but I am not concerned about that.
Planar reflections works great and has a noticeable performance hit (which is expected), I think it would be totally acceptable to have additional lights in a similar manner. I tried briefly to adapt the branches to the current baselines but did not have the time to proceed to a satisfactory level. The screenshots I saw would have been more than satisfactory for my use case, especially if it could be turned off when not needed. Some of the other time saving ocean / water projects out there (lacking many features) support lighting in this manner (or at least assert to). Is this something that can be put on a roadmap / future plan? I really feel like if Crest supported additional lighting there would be little reason to use anything else in most cases baring uses that required no more than a puddle of water or a pond you can't actually swim in but is more for scenic purposes, namely a functional ocean / body of water.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
https://crest.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/configuration.html?rp=birp
Crest BIRP does not support additional lights due to bugs in the pipeline and performance concerns. Please see #382 and #383 for more details.
Early on when I was evaluating which to use this, LUX, various other time savers, Lighting was one of the deal breakers (for right or wrong). At some point I evaluated Aura 2 and modified the Ocean.shader to have custom pass that adds volumetric lighting which at the time was a compromise for no light component support at all, other than directional lighting. This came at the cost of performance obviously but it was a desired trade off, something the user can turn off in settings for lower end machines, now I am no longer using Aura 2 due to unrelated reasons / requirements, but it proved to me it was possible to have a good lighting feature for this. At the time I also saw the 2 experimental branches that added lighting and I understood the concerns. But why not have this as a toggleable feature? Experimental? Is there still a show stopping bug? There must be some sort of workaround because it seems to work fluidly for similar projects some examples that do not meet my needs for other reasons but prove to me it is an obtainable goal:
https://youtu.be/uiEgukNGxrA (point-light)
https://youtu.be/1zx2hFxH7BI (spot-lights)
There are some other examples for URP, but I am not concerned about that.
Planar reflections works great and has a noticeable performance hit (which is expected), I think it would be totally acceptable to have additional lights in a similar manner. I tried briefly to adapt the branches to the current baselines but did not have the time to proceed to a satisfactory level. The screenshots I saw would have been more than satisfactory for my use case, especially if it could be turned off when not needed. Some of the other time saving ocean / water projects out there (lacking many features) support lighting in this manner (or at least assert to). Is this something that can be put on a roadmap / future plan? I really feel like if Crest supported additional lighting there would be little reason to use anything else in most cases baring uses that required no more than a puddle of water or a pond you can't actually swim in but is more for scenic purposes, namely a functional ocean / body of water.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: