Thread 1017944

I remember reading somewhere that old-school video games used to treat illumination through a lens of studio lighting. Instead of simulating rays, they use a combination of point/directional/spot/ambient light to convey the emotion of a scene.
Is there any blog or video that talks about this phenomenon in depth blending both technical and artistic knowledge, comparing different shading models from different era.

Also, PBR materials today is treated as some sort of divinely "correct" way to do stuff. When you talk about disadvantages, everyone gives a handwavy remark of "slightly" less performance. But how much? There are no exact metrics obtained by comparing two scenes that were designed with both traditional and PBR models in mind without bias.

>>1017944 (OP)
>another muh sovl thread
Grim
What is it with ngmis and jerking it to decades old tech used by actual artists dreaming of today's progress
Lack of talent supplanted by hidden esoteric knowledge of vampire the masquerade bloodlines? Normies could never?

>>1017944 (OP)
The two notions aren't linked. The lights thing isn't particularly linked to studio lighting, but to the fact that you could only afford a couple simple lights in a scene. So if you had 1-4 direct lights, some standard 3-point lighting was a handy approach. Once we could afford more complex setups that was mostly irrelevant, save for specifically wanting to reproduce studio lighting for aesthetic reason.

The reason PBR is correct is based on the idea you record a ground truth (either photos or fully accurately physically lit objects) of all the materials you might need and when you compute the difference between the ground truth and your shader PBR gets the least compared to most previous setups. That works in reverse, ie after that you can record your material of choice and comoute parameters from it and the rendered version will look accurate.

Because of that, its real use is as a standard exchange format: if your shader or engine conforms to, say, the disney principled pbr model, then you can source your materials from any library or program that also does, ie every program ever these days, and it'll look like intended. Before that you had better pray your shader wasn't too different from whatever they'd intended the material for.

>>1017947
Ah, so PBR materials and PBR lighting are different things. PBR material is convenient and more accurate representation define materials.

>>1017948
Pbr material is material using a pbr lighting model, so they are the same thing. A material is its lighting model, so to speak, at least in the scope of this conversation. But PBR lighting isn't linked to the change in lighting setup. It's the advent of programmable shaders and later deferred or forward plus lighting that led to being able to afford more complex setups per scene, and that long predates PBR

>>1017944 (OP)
>But how much?
none. pbr is fucking 3 maps in a game engine. the color map, the normal map, and a packed roughness, metallic, and ambient occlusion map.

You should light your scenes like theyre a studio because you want your audience to see and enjoy the objects you're rendering.
https://warosu.org/3/thread/996611

>>1017946
>actual artists
all 3d game assets are outsourced to india now

>>1018058
Average indian 12 year old working on AAA titles in a sweatshop for 3 rupees MOGS the fuck out of anyone on this board

>>1018059
he deserves it too, considering

>>1017944 (OP)
is this shit?

pbr with crunchy textures