We would like to inform you about a significant change coming to Substance 3D Designer. As indicated in the changelog of the 12.4.1 bugfix, this release of Designer will be the last one to support Substance model graphs. This decision has been made to streamline our focus on Material creation and enhance the user experience.
Our team has closely analyzed user feedback and adoption rates for the feature, and we've come to the conclusion that Designer is not the optimal platform for procedural geometry within the Substance 3D ecosystem. To fully concentrate on delivering cutting-edge features and improvements for Material artists, we have made the pragmatic decision to cease development of Substance model graphs and remove the feature from Designer entirely. This will allow us to move forward without constraints and dedicate our resources to areas that better serve our users.
We sincerely appreciate your understanding and support in this matter. Please stay tuned for future releases, as we continue to innovate and enhance the Designer experience for Material artists.
I thought the whole workflow in Designer was to use graphs.
Just how is one meant to create materials and tweak them without a graph?
Hi Angelo, we are not removing graphs, only the type of graph dedicated to procedural geometry (Substance model graph)
Substance compositing graph (the main one), still remains, like function graphs, MDL graphs, etc.
I had very high interest in this feature, that's such a shame to see this die.
It seems to me that the low adoption was on par with the marketing put on this feature.
This is very disappointing. My workflow for several clients is ruined.
I really like this feature, and I'm wondering if there is any plan in the future to have another parametric model generation graph software from you guys.
This is very bad news. Will the feature be implemented elsewhere or will it die altogether? After all, this kind of modelling is very promising especially for patterns, but not known at all among product designers. It would also require a slightly different workflow to be established.
this inlcudes the nodes like <= && nums bools and all that u know?
No, those are nodes used in so called function graphs and those will remain. Functions are a core feature of Designer and removing that would basically make it impossible to automate anything.
This is specifically about model graphs, so 3D models within Designer.
A bit late but I'd still like to express my disappointment about this decision, IMO this is a serious step backwards because it severely impacts Designers overal functionality, and not for the better I think. With all due respect but I cannot help but notice that the price for Designer effectively went up, while it now basically provides less functionality than before. That's kinda peculiar I think.
I also don't quite understand this decision because from what I can see the 3D View pane still remains. So core support for 3D is still a thing within Designer yet for some - in my opinion - vague reasons we're no longer given the option to control any specific parts of it anymore? And from what I understand this functionality also doesn't get picked up by any of the other Substance environments either. While you say that not too many people use it... I cannot help but notice that the ones who do use this quite often and very in-depth. Could it be that the main reason not too many people have picked up on this is because your documentation on the matter was rather poor? That's not a sneer, that's a conclusion that has also been shared by some of your own staff. I know how difficult it is to write such documentation, I'm a vivid writer myself.
But I really think you highly underestimate the importance model graphs had for several of us. Still using Painter & Designer 2022 myself so nothing changed for me, but I heavily rely on these models to bring information about my mesh into my substance graph where I work on texture presets (unfortunately not with direct connections); these values (or rather: value differences) can then help me to apply specific automated changes to the texture in order to compensate for some deformation when some parts of the mesh get changed. Think about the use of morphs for instance.
I once even took this one step further by "abusing" the substance graph base base parameters: I exposed some of those in order to get input nodes for the SBS graph in my model graph, only to undo the actual changes within the SBS graph itself (through use of functions and static variables). Resulting in me getting automated measurements from my mesh within the SBS graph.
It's a shame that we'll have to continue to rely on hacks to make all of this work, but c'est la vie I guess.
Looks like there is a misunderstanding. Substance model graph was a new kind of graph introduced in the 11.2 version of Designer. We are not removing "everything related to 3D models" from Designer, that's why of course you still have a 3D View, bakers, etc. Note that Substance model graph was completely disconnnected from other graphs, so you don't lose any features in Substance materials graphs or MDL graphs.
Substance model graph was a way to create procedural geometry. The procedural model was exported as a SBSM file, only readable in Substance 3D Stager.
In your message, it looks like you are talking about bakers, and do not worry, bakers are still part of Designer.
This is incredibly disappointing news. The model graphs are an integral part of our workflow. honestly, we are now considering moving away from substance designer completely. The mdl support is substandard and now the removal of model graphs is a show-stopper.
Can you explain me what is your current workflow, and how you are using Substance model graphs?
We make substance materials for physical Architectural materials which can vary greatly in scale or repeat detail. We have integrated a number of parametric substance model graphs into our workflow to simulate different sample sizes and geometry types, as well as a full interior apartment scene and a replica of our material scanning box to ensure exact comparison from calibrated photographs to the materials we are creating. We have found that simply evaluating the appearance of materials based on a single object with her environment alone was not good enough to QC the materials being created when accuracy is paramount. The model graphs we have include parametric rulers and an xrite color checker to streamline validation and approval of materials being created.
Right now we are sticking with an older version of substance designer to maintain parity with the mdl version we currently support in our render plugin pipeline, and also to avoid some issues with mdl graphs that were introduced in later versions, so the removal of model graphs doesn't impact us directly right now, but we do intend to update in the near future and the removal of the model graphs will mean a major overall of our production pipeline. I do realise we can continue/change over to use referenced static fbx assets so we will see if this is a viable option (but from my experience so far, I do not think this will be enough and we will resort to validating the materials in another package). To be honest I truly felt the model graphs added a critical element to the workflow in substance designer, as they allowed us to complete all of our material creation and validation in one place.
actually on the subject of archviz support the removal of tonemapping support was also a big issue. Setting up and checking physical lighting materials with/without ies profiles or environments with physical output, as well as evaluating materials in conjunction with them is now pretty pointless in Substance. Why you wouldn't have a simple exposure control on the camera at least is beyond me. Having to adjust all of the lighting levels globally to achieve the same result is counter-intuitive.
In my opinion, this approach of the R&D team may be the decision of the Marketing Department, because it is not surprising to sell one apple as two apples
That's a bummer. Just recently I saw a video of some guy placing a chimney on top of a castle having bricks procedureally getting deleted where the chimney was.. something like that..
The potential was huge.. Anyway people do have better tools like houdini and bifrost (maya) for such workflows but it was kinda neat to use the power of nodes on models in a tool I'm familiar with.
I hope the removal of less popular feature will increase focus on the main features and bug fixes.