On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Brecht Van Lommel <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I think negative colors should be opt-out. I don't think it's really > harmful, usually it will just give black in cases where it's not > useful, and developers will forgot to opt-in when adding new > properties. Negative material colors may be a case where this is > actually useful in some rare cases. > > With any property where you go outside of the soft limits, there's the > chance that things will work strangely, to me that is sort of the > point of the hard/soft limits, allowing those who know what they're > doing to bend the rules a bit. > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:30 PM, Roger Wickes From IPhone > <[email protected]> wrote: >> There's actual pixel data which is 0-1.0 for rgba. But all the other >> bastardizations of 'image' really should use a different structure entirely >> like for displacement maps, z-depth/distance, masks, vector-pixel data and >> even intermediate compo results (even if saved in a exr container) even >> though the currrent rgba grid container has been handy, it has been >> pertubated way too much imho.but that would be a recode...perhaps force exr >> as an internal format that could support all the above? > > EXR has nothing to do with this, it's a file format for saving on > disk, the internal float buffers in the compositor can store all this > data just fine. It's only a UI issue, and not really that relevant > here, since e.g. a displacement or depth property (not compositing > buffer) will not be exposed as a color, and even there we do actually > have separate buffer types for scalars, vectors and colors. > > Brecht.
To close the topic, thanks Brecht for 3rd opinion :) Reverted this change and applied clamping to colors which are display only, fcurve's & grease pencil for eg. _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
