https://i.ytimg.com/vi/m1PkSViBi-M/hqdefault.jpg
Blender tutorial showing you how to make photorealistic metal! Using laws from the real world to make metal that actually looks like metal.
Download the finished .blend from Blender Guru:
http://www.blenderguru.com/tutorials/making-realistic-pbr-materials-part-2-metal/
Other Links:
PBR Encyclopedia: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Fb9_KgCo0noxROKN4iT8ntTbx913e-t4Wc2nMRWPzNk/edit?usp=sharing
Art is a Verb PBR: http://artisaverb.info/PBT.html
source
24 responses to “How to Make Photorealistic Materials – Part 2: Metal”
Much appreciate the videos and effort you put into them mate, has been heaps of fun using them (in conjunction with other efforts) to put Blender through its paces. Can never have too many tools in the toolbox to say.
I myself am not too sure on what to make of the roughness values. Value sliders are linear, and it seems Blender takes such input and square roots it, creating the logarithmic change you observed. To square something is the inverse of square rooting… How linear the actual result is donno (depends on if the input really was being square rooted, or if more is actually occurring), but at least this trick makes it appear to be close enough to linear ^_^
I've built a supernode group, that does most everything (dielectrics, metals, either with or without textures), and just needs colour or texture image nodes added as inputs. Really cleans up the node area and speeds up process. Still working some undesired kinks though…mostly in roughness input of the supernode group. One such example being having to convert 0 to 1 values into -1 to 1 (achieved by maths nodes, subtract 2, then multiply by 2, and then add 3). In doing so, one thing that crossed my mind, was that the same maths that was applied to the roughness input, gets applied when you supply the deformations (finger prints, etc) texture data to it. Mainly as this would matter in how the deformation textures are made (black to white values being linear or logarithmic). I tested muted and not and in my particular setup, left it on as it seemed correct.
Now, I have been up 30 hours fooling around with Blender so I am half asleep so it is also possible I have gotten some stuff foobulated.
Either way, much thanks again, you have been a great help mate!
just spent the whole video looking at your mirror.
Blender renders it exactly like how solids look like in 3D view. I have a spot light.
Eevee will release us i guess xD! We thought internal will die but unstead cycle will.
Download the ready-made file… follow the tutorial all along just to not feel guilty
Thanks anyway 😀
I found this out when I was making a gold pen with glossy as well as rough surfaces, and with diffuse shader I couldn't get a real looking result. Never used diffuse shader with metal surfaces since then.
Awesomeness broseph! I'm now fully Super Duper Nodiified! After 2 days of watching and rewatching your 2 part tutorial I have become the ultimate nodifier and I hope you never, ever let that link break! Just in case my PBR_nodes.blend file gets Kersmudgened somehow. I could never replicate that intense Node within a node within a node, etc. nightmare again! Never mind that I learned a Node ton of info! Thanx a Node Group bunch Bro_node! https://www.youtube.com/wat…
It's getin, it's getin, it's gettin kinda hectic broseph!!!!@
Do we need the Fresnel node group you created in the last vid when we're now using Principled BSDF?
So im stuck at the part where you open up Blender.exe, how do you do that? 😛
Fantastic tutorial Andrew, now that i've done both, im going to sleep off this headache 😀
Trying to find a video on making realistic metal in blender is really a pain in the @&& because i dont wanna watch a 40 minute video just too download some dudes files or use 2.79 which says that older versions INCLUDING 2.78c might not work due to "data-block pointer properties" which i dont know what that means. I just cant find a single video. Ima try 2.79 and see what happens but if it doesnt work ill either wait a couple months or something for 2.79's release or one of you know where a video could be. Im not hating on this channel. i LOVE this channel but im just getting stressed out so much.
The closet mirror kept distracting me
I thought your voice was familiar. I didn't put together that you're Poliigon.
part 1 and 2 are great! I followed it all to the second.. and still i f*kd up something i guess…. at the end of the metal node (before the uber one) the color goes from base met. trough mix 1 mix 2 glossy and to the group output… effect at my side… solid black. when i replace the goup output for an meterial output it works.. and wehen the group output is connected outside the node tree to that same node its black… i'm like what the f…. any idea how thats possible ?
any way, your tutorials are the BOM! big thnax form the Netherlands 🙂
do u know
They need to make a specialized program for texturing
Roughness value isn't bug. Your integer value is "linear", but "Roughness" value is logarithmic. You must convert "linear" to "logarithmic". Bacause of this you must power by 2.2 (not 2, because 2.2 is standard gamma value for sRGB). This is logarithmic conversion formula…
No, IOR is most important thing for realizm. 1.45 and 2.9 is never same thing. This value determine how much reflective (and refractive) a material.
Title: "How to Make >>Photorealistic<< Materials – Part 2: Metal"
Content: "Ah I want to let my artistic creativity flow so let's ignore these real values and choose what looks nice"
+Blender Guru
From what you explained at the beginning, I would have composed the shader differently.
If metal only has reflective color, and the refraction is absorbed, I would do the metal shader just as the dialectric shader, but instead of the diffuse shader, I would absorb it (diffuse to black, or even delete the shader at all), and set the reflective color to the color input. That way even changing the Fresnel works, since it also changes the strength of the center reflection.
I know this is a video that's one year old. That being said, one thing that's bugging me is that when you're explaining the theory of metal you put your face at the edge of the screen. That's annoying because after a while we lose interest in the picture and we focus on what you're saying and it feels like we are loosing something if we don't make eye contact to the person explaining it. I don't know if you get it, but, all I'm saying is that you should make it easier for us to see you when you're passing us information, this is maybe something about 'eye contact', I don't know, it just feels weird to not see the person that's talking. All I'm trying to say is that you on the left corner is too hard to see, you are being the main source of information, you should be centered. Yes, the pictures is big part of what you're saying, but after a while we don't have anything to see there. Just a piece of feedback there. Awesome channel.
Maybe another question, i use HDR as lightsource and it shows a bit of shadow on the floor, but it's way too light, how can i darken the shadow's of that? I used this tutorial for the metals on my meshes, but found out that the HDR don't have a good shadow. Thanks
Hi Blender Guru, at 20:48 you copy the node, but i don't see the RGB node in that node editor.
I did the Iron first that went well, but how you copy the RGB node to make a silver one?
I use the button TAB to switch into the groups and out of it, but i don't see the RGB node in the group if you know what i mean.
Also it doesn't look the same here although i have Blender 2.77 and using cycles render.
Please let me know thanks.
can you also do a setup tour
I have one other thing that I kinda wish you would get right. You keep confusing "subdivision" or "sub-d" and calling it "sub surf". Sub surface refers to the lighting effects. Please, to lessen the confusion…if you are talking about subdivided objects…call it "sub-d" (as has been the convention for a long time) and sub surface shaders as "sub-surf" (again, as has been the standard)
The thing most 3D Artists don't understand (maybe they do) is we fake it. We use 3D apps to fake what we see in the real world. Example: Reflectivity. Yes, in the real world, there is little to no "diffuse"… but to be a true "PHYSICS BASED RENDERER" would need to take into account Einstein's "Photoelectric Effect". Take the word "dielectric"…it's faked (electric, again has nothing to do with our 3D work, but we fake it). These apps don't go that deep. We fake it. As soon as you assign a color to the "reflection"…you are bypassing physics and faking it. Call it what you want…"diffuse" or whatever…but it's faked. Don't be fooled by "PBR" Yes you can use physics in 3D rendering..but even how light rays bounce around in 3D rendering is faked. Yes, you can get great results…pretty accurate. But when you reallize we are faking it, and assigning a "color" to "reflection"…we are bypassing that physics and just saying "It's brass, so it needs to be this color". Physics is a HUGE part of rendering..but we are bypassing a LOT to get that result.