UBER - Standard Shader Ultra

I want to know UBER performance in webgl
thank you

 

Test of uber + tesselation on my colum sculpted in mudbox and painted in substance painter:
(1080p)

The snow effect fit perfectly the model too:

 

It's not easy in standard shader nor in UBER which extends it. Look at UBER_StandardCore.cginc there vertex and fragments functions are placed. Beware - the whole shader structure is not easy to follow (many functions are distributed over many functions, includes and macros). Look for vertForwardBase, vertForwardAdd and vertDeferred definitions in the file.

I still see something like this in Unity standard shader

#pragma exclude_renderers gles

which means they don't work for GLES2.0. I'm not sure which platform WebGL uses, but generaly if something works OKish for DX9 it will work the same for WebGL. You can expect similar performance to Unity Standard Shader whn you don't use fancy stuff like water snow or POM. Otherwise it gets more expensive. I didn't make any real tests for WebGL though.

Tom

 

You know how to make my day (you could add just a tiny spice of glitter which works nice for orugh minreal materials like rocks). Keep up your fantastic work !

ATB, Tom

 

Good advice, I'll give a look to this feature !

Edit : LOD test with tesselation:

 

I think unity in the mobile terminal advantage

UBER hope getting better and better ！！！

 

Hi Tomas, any idea on these two requests?

Cheers, Jules

 

Easy to promise, harder to find some time to make it. Translucency - current approach is not suitable for using skyboxes for translucency as we need light direction to take into account while skybox is infinitely directional (whole sphere is light emitter). I could think about something like we see skylight passing thru the object.

For cut+transparent it's not possible with one regular shader I guess. First pass would be for example deferred while the other would be forward (transparent) and done on completely different queue (at the end). So such objects need to be rendered twice anyway - think if you can use 2 objects with different material blending modes (both using UBER) to have such effect. If you ask for genuine vegetation with vertex animations - I'd say - no (UBER would get to specialized and denominated - one user needs vegetation, other skin, other glowing particles, etc.) Go for AFS maybe if you'd like to have better foliage.

Tom

 

Hi Tom,

Thanks, we're doing fairly high poly, high res facial stuff, so SSS / translucency becomes quite important to our workflow. these meshes have both bone and blendshape animation on them, so duplicating this is not ideal (since we'll be duplicating all the animation overhead as well as raw polycount). We're using a forward lighting setup, would it be possible to simply have two shader passes, one cutout one transparent with a dynamic queue on it? (excuse me if I'm way off, my shader knowledge is rusty).

Translucency using sky domes would be awesome, a lookup with controllable gloss (mip levels?) would be awesome.

Thanks for the info,

Jules

 

Could you explain how would you like to use this 2 pass shader of facial meshes ?

Tom

 

I'm considering getting UBER, do you know if it works well with Candela SSRR? https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/41742

 

This Candela SSRR is a screen space only solution, so yes, without having it tested specifically, it is compatible with every possible shader, including UBER

 

Thanks, I thought that'd be the case, but thought i should double check...

 

Hi Tom,

Sorry for the delay. We're doing augmented head / emotion tracking projects, overlaying 'masks' on a video feed. The overlaying often requires alpha transparency to blend the mask into the persons face (specific requirements vary mask to mask).

On a side note, how do you control the render queue on your shaders? It's probable I'm making some stupid assumptions, but I have created a custom version of ""UBER - Specular Setup/ Core" (inside the custom shaders directory) and simply changed the queue tag:

Code (csharp):

1. Tags { "RenderType"="Opaque" "Queue"="Geometry+100" "PerformanceChecks"="False" "REFR"="Off" "TWO_LAYERS"="Off"}

But this has no effect, or at least dosen't draw on top of the other shaders.

Many thanks,

Jules

 

Indeferred - if Candela redefines lighting internal shader it will work but you won't have UBER specific properties working (like translucency in defered). Anyway one of my friends checked this and it worked (can't tell if he used translucency). There might occur some issues due to newest U5.3 updates (that redefines a lot of things to make it possible doing SSR more effectively). I'n in hte middle of updating UBER to work with U5.3. As far as I see Candella is released Sep15th so it's probably not U5.3 ready, but I can't tell for them.Unity themselves introduce SSR.

 

If it doesn't react t render queue it might be related to lightng path (forward/transparent objects are drawn last). I also experienced sometimes Unity doesn't take Queue into account where some staticaly batched objects are on the scene. Anyway - I don't control queue - it's up to Unity, so I can't help you here.

Tom

 

Would require tweaking Unity lighting code in forward lighting path. possible but not straightforward. Anyway - I won't introduce this in UBER, because it would not be "standard shader" anymore .

Tom

 

I would like to know the difference between Uber Shaders and the RTP pack. Also, should I expect any troubles with RTP in Unity 5.3?

 

RTP is meant to shade terrains. UBER is standard shaders with extensive add ons and improvements. I'll take care about U5.3 with new versions releases planned beginning of January.

Tom

 

Sorry, but I meant RSP instead of RTP. What's the difference between RSP and Uber Shaders? I'm glad to know about the RTP upgrade cause I already own it. I was wondering if I'll get a discount towards the purchase of RSP once I have Uber and RTP.

 

Edited: I figured it out about 2 minutes after posting this. I think I just had to type it all out before the solution presented itself to me. I was setting the wrong keyword. The below code is corrected and is the working version.

Hey Tom, I am setting up a material that has a detail mask/detail albedo/metallic/normal all set at runtime and I seem to be able to get most of the values set but for some reason that material instance doesn't reflect the color changes.

Here is the code I am using to set the values:
Shader: UBER - Metallic Setup/Tessellation/2 Sided/ Core

Code (CSharp):

1.  
2. mat.SetTexture("_DetailMask", Sail1DecalSpain);
3. mat.SetTexture("_DetailAlbedoMap", Sail1DecalSpain);
4. mat.SetTexture("_DetailNormalMap", mat.GetTexture("_BumpMap"));
5. mat.SetTexture("_MetallicGlossMapDetail", mat.GetTexture("_MetallicGlossMap"));
6. mat.SetColor("_DetailColor", Sail1DecalSpainColor);
7.  
8. //mat.EnableKeyword("_DETAIL_SIMPLE");
9. //mat.EnableKeyword("_DETAIL_TEXTURED");
10. mat.EnableKeyword("_DETAIL_TEXTURED_WITH_SPEC_GLOSS");
11.  

The code is running, and doesn't throw any errors but my material still doesn't reflect all of the changes:


You can see the visible outline of the emblem, so the mask is applying, but the actual albedo doesn't appear at runtime.

Now, if I go to that mesh in the editor (while running), select it and then expand the material instance this happens:



So I am not sure what part I am missing to get this to finish the application at runtime. I think something in the material editor is triggering the full application of the settings but so far I cannot figure out what.

 

The demo of your asset is amazing !
http://www.stobierski.pl/unity/UBER.html

Beside of your asset, does it has used any 3rd party asset in this demo?
I can see some dirty lens and bloom effect.

 

I helped Tom with his demo, as far as i remember we only used sonic ether's natural bloom(and standard assets tonemapping after it). AFAIK, everything else is included with UBER's example scene.

 

Sorry for the total noob question, but I'm trying to figure out where to start...

Should I simply replace the Unity Standard Shader that all my materials use or do I need to be selective?

I plan on using deferred rendering since my scenes are light count heavy. Doing it for all creates a nice standard for me to follow, but I'm not sure if there's a performance impact.

 

RSP is predecessor of UBER. It works only for Unity4. It's still available on AssetStore because I want to give my current RSP users opportunity to upgrade to UBER for $1. (That's why RSP is $49 while UBER is $50).

You can do it for multiple materials at once, but if you don't plan to use any specific UBER features - what's the reason you'd like to do it ? Replacing shaders in this case won't make it automatically looking better. You need to know which features you'd like to use, tweak their parameters.

For basic features UBER is not much more expensive vcomparing to Unity Standard Shader. If you require POM with dynamic water and snow you need to expect your shading its hunger for GPU power.

Tom

 

I have 5 words to describe these shaders: awesome, awesome, awesome awesome, awesome! These shaders will take my mediocre newbie levels and make them look AAA. Thanks Tomasz for such wonderful asset!

 

Thanks Tom. Some assets are just total replacements for Unity's default. I wasn't sure if there would be a benefit (or cost) of simply using UBER all the time... even if I didn't need any thing special for some materials. But, you answered it. Thanks!

 

Recently got Uber, really cool stuff

1. Any way to make the parallax height effect go up/down (like standard shaders), instead of just downward ? (I have no need for silhouettes)

2. I write custom shaders as part of my work, is it difficult to inject custom cgcode to the Uber shaders ?
or alternatively just reuse features such as POM on my own shaders ?

 

1. UBER_StandardUtils.cginc - ParallaxOffset1Step() function
2. UBER_StandardCore.cginc - look around there are vertex/fragment functions placed for misc lighting paths (forward,deferred,meta)

Tom

 

awesome thanks

 

Ok tried the things you suggested.

1. Actually I meant change the displacement for POM, I want the fancy lighting & shadows but don't care about silhouettes.

2. meant injecting my own vert/frag/surface function code, doesn't seem possible am I correct ?
I love your shaders though, would it be possible to make a duplicate of your StandardCore and set some surface function operations (specifically I want custom vertex color blending with noise)

3. talking of which, why doesn't POM work in the "Two-layer" shader ?

 

Injecting your code is pretty much possible. Not your won functions as a whole, but you can inject your code into my vert/frag functions. To not copy core include you can use #define #ifdef keywords. Place your own specific code inside #ifdef KEYWORD ... #endif sections, copy shader and place #define KEYWORD at the top of the shader.

POM in 2 layers mode - I didn't make it possible for many reasons. Primarialy - performance and keeping code more straightforward.

Tom

 

Hi Tom,

I'm having some issues getting POM working. See my screenshot:



No matter what method of POM I try to set up, none of them have any effect on my models.

I tried putting the texture on a cube to bypass the cylindrical nature of my model, but the POM still doesn't show.

How do I go about making POM work properly for this model? Sorry I'm a POM noob

 

Check if your heoghtmap has alpha channel. We don't need RGB color channels. So - use alpha from graysacale in texture import settings and use Alpha8 encoding (select advanced as testure type first to see more options).

Tom

 

It works! And it looks really nice. I'm creating a romanesque castle demo scene with your software - I'll post some results soon.

How does one get to know the UV coordinate system better in relation to POM? I see you are using specific POM coordinate textures for the doughnut and column models in your demos. How do I understand these?

 

Hi Tom!

I'm currently trying to add translucency to my characters body (especially ears). I've baked a translucency map in xNormal, but i'm not too sure where to insert it into the shader. Currently i've inserted the translucency in the "R" channel of the Ambient Occlusion map, but it does not seem to affect translucency on my character - all skin on my character gets translucent red (i changed it from white) instead of just the parts on the translucency map.

I use deffered rendering. I've attached the correct scripts to the camera and directional light, and changed the shader to "Internal_DefferedShading_UBER". If it makes any difference, i also use GGX for the fancy specularity.

What am i doing wrong?

 

Tom, I don't know if this problem is kno
wn, but Uber doesn't seem to work well with Directional Specular lightmaps...
This is a scene with Directional Specular maps baked. Everything white are Uber shaders, just the rocks in the background are standard:

Here's the same scene with directional lightmaps (not re-baked, that's why GI is messed up):

Do you know whats going on and is there any way to fix this?
Seems like the specular values are extremely high...

Edit: Might be of interest, too:

Basically I enabled wetness and adjusted the water level so we can see both 'correct' and weird result.

 

Thank you very much Tom, I was able to add custom blending to albedo/metallic/normal/parallax
Really glad you kept everything consistent with standard shader, a lot of devs around overlook this !

Parallax Blending
Blending the parallax is trickier though (here's a test video, core shaders followed by blended ones)
Afaik, issues caused by the parallax having ray texel offset, which doesn't line up with the planar blending.. (see code)

Code (csharp):

1. _h = tex2Dlod(_ParallaxMap, rayPos.xyww).PARALLAX_CHANNEL;.
2. _h = lerp (0.5, _h, blendFade);    // I reused your blendFade for my own uses

1. You can see the floor edges look weird in video, is it possible to make the POM effect displace in/out (overlay), instead of only inward ? (granted I don't need the "silhouette" feature)
2. Would the above also fix the issue I have with the blending ?
3. If not, how would you suggest to fix the blending issues ?

 

I have the same problem. For me it seems that smothness from normal Map options is not readed right.
I have smothness from min 0 to max 0.2 for example. This was always working fine. Starting from Unity 5.2.1 I get the really white "reflecting" results. If I change it to min 0 max 1 everything seems normal. So perhaps something is wrong with reading normal map options.

 

When changing from 0 to 1 I get very smooth surfaces, which means they nearly look normal...

 

Will Skyshop asset enhance this shader in any way? If yes, can you explain a little bit please? I also would like to know about other assets compatible with this shader.

 

I've been reported on specularity problems with lightmaps on U5.3. I will look into this next week to make quick update of UBER with a few additional improvements.

New UBER update will make it possible to use independent translucency settings in deferred (not only color like it's currently done). So now you select only a color index in deferred that will be used and all translucency params are shared across all objects in deferred. In incoming UBER update (for U5.3) you will be able to select "setup index" not "color index" and handle 4 independent setups. So - ears will use one, snow another, foliage yet another, and so on.

Tom

 

Skyshop uses it's own PBR implementatiopn while I'm relying on Unity one. They are completely indepentent products. Anyway - you will get no better shading buying Skyshop when you've got UBER.

Tom

 

Thanks Tom. It looks like I will save Skyshop money for now, at least until I'm more experienced in game development and know the specific use of Skyshop and perhaps use it for a specific project. I'm glad that I don't have to get it for now cause I was seriously thinking to get it and is more expensive than your shaders. But enough highjacking this thread with other assets lol. I owned RTP for a few months now and I bought Uber a few days ago so you can say that I'm a loyal client. I've done anything with them yet, but now I feel more confident to start to practice and also to start a project. That is thanks to other assets that I bought and of course your shaders. Thanks for the shaders cause they are great help for us newbies.

I would like to know if you are currently working in any new asset cause I might be interested in getting it for sure. Again thanks for the shaders!

 

Not to hijack the thread ... but is there a particular reason you'd be looking at using Skyshop? I thought there was no longer a reason for using it, once Unity moved to version 5 and native PBR. But I could be mistaken.

My understanding is you do all of the Skyshop stuff with Unity's standard shading, and then you use UBER as an extension to the Unity standard shading.

 

Basically the interest is lack of knowledge because I'm a newbie and the amount of information that I need to assimilate is really massive and sometimes I get exhausted reading and learning and because of that I didn't have the time to learn that Unity's new PBR system is similar to Skyshop. Is just that I saw the demo and user's reviews and thought that it would be nice and beautiful to have those shaders in my project. Tom and now you just made things more clear by teaching me that Uber enhances Unity's native PBR system and with the combination of both I can get similar results or maybe better results than Skyshop. So I'll change my mind and will not buy Skyshop and save the money for other assets or perhaps a future Tom's asset. Thanks for the reply guys and have a wonderful evening.

 

Any luck getting Uber to work with RTP in 5.3 yet?

 

They will fit together.

Tom

P.S. RTP3.3 introduces so many changes, that this is strongly recommended to remove RTP3.2 installation before going to RTP3.3.

 

Hi,

You might already know, but I'm getting two deprecation warnings in Unity 5.3.1p2:

Assets/UBER/Scripts/UBER_GlobalParams.cs(323,40): warning CS0618: `UnityEngine.ParticleSystem.emissionRate' is obsolete: `emissionRate property is deprecated. Use emission.rate instead.'

Assets/UBER/Scripts/UBER_GlobalParams.cs(326,40): warning CS0618: `UnityEngine.ParticleSystem.emissionRate' is obsolete: `emissionRate property is deprecated. Use emission.rate instead.'

 

Yes, I know, but making it fine seems to be impossible currently (new emission object in particle system seems to not have setter for emission rate...). Tried on 5.3.1.f1, maybe they fixed this in patch. This is, however, harmless. More problematic is specularity not working fine, I'll post UBER 1.1 for U5.3 as soon as possible.

Tom