Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?message_id=4124427

You might remember that SR 3.0 hosed my OpenGL preview so I had to revert back to SR 2.0.

http://www.renderosity.com/mod/forumpro/showthread.php?message_id=4124427

I'm happy to say that SR 3.1 fixed the problems I had.

Sorta.  ;-p

Well, there's no such thing as a free lunch, so if you have the same problems as I had, you'll have to work to make your OpenGL preview using SR 3.1 as nice as it used to be.

So, let's see where the problem is and how to solve it.

The first render shows an OpenGL screenshot of one of my figures as loaded from the library. ( Remember everything looked perfectly fine with SR 2.0 )

Can you tell what I did ?

Yes, Transparency_Edge is LAVA now !!!

Do not step on it, do not touch it, don't plug anything into it, do not use it !

Instead plug your transmap into Transparency_Falloff (And Transparency, of course), and set both to "1.0".

Weeeellll, I sure am glad there is a fix and I can make now use of all the other improvements that come with SR 3.1. (Whatever they may be. OK, there does seem to be a noticeable speed improvement with more elaborate scenes.)

But I will also have to change literally hundreds of files I created in the last couple of years. (Custom figures saved with textures and hair, hair pieces, props saved with transparency as well as all the custom shaders I made as long as they contain transparency.)

So excuse me if my "attaboy" turns out a little unenthusiastic.

But hey that's Poser for ya, never a boring day.

;-)

Transparency edge has always been for when you want the transparency to change as your point of view (angle of incidence) changes.

The fact that thousands upon thousands of shaders connected it up, but set it to the same value, indicating you DO NOT want a change based on angle of incidence, is bizarre.

Also, if you have transparency falloff set to 0, transparency edge does nothing. So all these old shaders were saying "I want and need a falloff based on angle of incidence and what I want is that when you look straight at it, it is T and when you are edge-on it is T."

Don't thank SM. Thank all yourselves for saying 1 by way of 6 + 8 * 3 - 29 * cos(0). Sometimes when you mean 1, you ought to just say 1.

I will grant, however, that the preview should be capable of executing falloff. As it is, it would appear that they coded it to just give up if you're asking for falloff.

In the case of hair and lashes, nobody EVER actually wanted falloff, so having made the shader more complicated and now finding OpenGL display can't do it - ... well I just find it silly.

The proper, simple, direct way to say you want transparency = T (your T-map) is

Transparency = 1 <-------> T-Map

Transparency_Falloff = 0

Transparency_Edge = I don't care because it is not used if falloff = 0

"The proper, simple, direct way to say you want transparency = T (your T-map) is

Transparency = 1 <-------> T-Map

Transparency_Falloff = 0

Transparency_Edge = I don't care because it is not used if falloff = 0"

Well, that seems logical.

But...

Transparency = 1 <-------> T-Map

Transparency_Falloff = 1 <-------> T-Map

Transparency_Edge = 0

...still looks both better in OpenGL as well as the final render.