I made the “metal_anisotropic” matcap that is currently in Blender. It is completely metalic, so the diffuse layer is completely black, and the whole texture is on the specular layer. But one of the reasons for the specular layer is that it is not tinted, when color is applied to the matcap. But in this case you would want the metal to change color, because otherwide nothing would happen. So should the matcap be rendered to the diffuse layer instead?
Should completely metallic matcaps like mine even have two layers?
The matcap is made using an HDRI from HDRI Haven. Should I pack the HDRI into the .blend file? This will of course increase the file size by quite a bit, but you would not need to download the hdri first.
Can we submit new Matcaps too, or just source files for the existent ones?
@pablovazquez are these updates actually going to be included in 2.81? The release is pretty close and only a few have been updated and none of those are in the builds. It’s quite an improvement IMO, so I’d be happy to go through and update the ones from other authors if they haven’t done so. That way all default matcaps will work with the specular lighting control.
this is great, use it often. Did you got nay response ?
Also are all of these already in 2.82 ? When they will be included by default.
What happened with the old Blender matcaps prior to 2.8. There were some very nice ones back then. How can we get them Blender 2.8 ?
@mfhscoobydoo so why is your Specular Jade new matcap Black ?
@jonlampel The link for youe metal hard surface Exr is not working anymore
Does anyone have more hard surface oriented modeling matcaps ?
About the old Matcaps
were they just Jpeg files ? Ive cheched this topic on CG masters about Getting Blender 2.79 Matcaps into 2.8 and it seems they were just images. I just downloaded the matcaps as images from the provided github link and install them in Blender just like the current .exr and they seem to work just fine ?
They have to be updated or they are good to use as Jpeg as they are now? SO why not keeping some of the old but true and tried matcaps very useful for surface analysis like these ones
I have a weakness for 5th from left (red one) and it seems Gleb Alexandrov likes it as much as me
@pablovazquez Any news on when the new MatCaps will be added? There are some really nice looking ones already in this thread that I can’t wait to try out!
It looks like the author tried to capture the effect of “aerial perspective”, when the density of the air dilutes the shadows, which is true for very distant objects and is not suitable for sculpting, because objects are usually sculpted close.
As a result it looks like semi-transparent ghost clay, not a solid clay, it’s contrast level pretty low, the color of its shadows looks like sunburnt, so it looks flat or broken.
The next one looks more like “clay_brown” than this red wax, so it was named wrong
Also, red wax is better than most 2.9 matcaps (for example, matcaps like zebra and carpaint have serious usability issues), and it is associated with professional sculpting program like Zbrush, so it is ok, but is needed to be fixed.
Except that it was the most hated matcap of all time, so hated that Pixo had to add a feature to change the default startup matcap. hahaha funny times…
The ability to change the default matcap is a necessary customization functionality, no wonder people asked for it. It’s like a melody on an alarm clock that becomes hateful anyway, no matter how good it is.
If Blender, like Zbrush, allowed any one default matcap, I would be the first to ask for customization flexibility.
Zerba basically, a nice idea, but disallow to see mesh or selection.
Probably, zebra should be a separate shader with the ability to setup in more flexible way
