Timeline for Can I make a boolean effect with shaders?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| yesterday | comment | added | Gordon Brinkmann | Yeah, I see. I just thought there was something wrong because I didn't see any effect. Nice addition anyway if you want to recreate the Boolean modifier. I just didn't bother to do this in my answer because he specifically wanted to look inside the cube. | |
| yesterday | history | edited | Markus von Broady | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 153 characters in body
|
| yesterday | comment | added | Markus von Broady | @GordonBrinkmann You're right. My reasoning was, I don't expect to see the outside of the cutter, but this outside is removed by the alpha calculation anyway. meanwhile the outside that is inside the main object is occluded by that main object. And if you play with transparency then you probably want to display both inside/outside. So I think this backface culling only works as a potential optimization. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Gordon Brinkmann | Now that I downloaded your file there's two things I don't understand: I cannot see any difference between enabling and disabling camera backface culling, so why bother is it necessary? The other thing is, I would suppose this to not work in Cycles, because the camera backface culling is only available in EEVEE, which would be a problem if someone wants to render with Cycles (or at least you would need a different material for it). But I just tested it - fortunately, since the culling doesn't seem to have any effect, the material works in Cycles just as well without changing it. | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Gordon Brinkmann | No, don't delete it, yours is good too. I just figured mine out quicker as I said, otherwise I would have made it similar to yours too. | |
| yesterday | history | edited | Markus von Broady | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 421 characters in body
|
| yesterday | comment | added | Markus von Broady | @GordonBrinkmann your solution is pretty much the same - instead of "absolute"->"greater than" you use "compare". Instead of taking the maximum to make the comparison once, you do 3 separate comparisons, which might be easier to understand or modify. I thought about deleting my answer after seeing yours but figured some people prefer short answers ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ | |
| yesterday | comment | added | Gordon Brinkmann | Oh, that's the simpler setup I couldn't think of quick enough. Well, mine can still be used if you do not want the cutout to be spaced equal in all directions (I know, you can do this by scaling the axes differently, I'm just clutching for straws to rectify my more complicated solution 🤣). At least my answer was the first... 🤣 | |
| yesterday | history | answered | Markus von Broady | CC BY-SA 4.0 |