Is even possible to have a NME generated material exported via BABYLON.GLTF2Export?

Hi there:

As a specification of one project, my colleague @joie and I are both in the need of have a NME material exported by means of the GLTF2 exporter. That exported model will be shown then to the user in AR via Google’s model-viewer.

The case is that I think that thing is probably not possible, due to the same nature of such kind of NME materials. Please take a look at this playground in order to have a more specific idea of the problem here. As you can see, the exported file only has assigned the non NME material.

The process is flawless with PBR or Standard materials, but sadly, I require instead triplanar PBR materials, what I think are only available using the aforementioned NME functionality, as stated in this other thread of the forum.

Best regards.

Triplanar is not supported in gltf so there is no way to do that unfortunately.

You would need a custom gltf extension to support triplanar.

And it also means in AR google would need to support your material. As you rely on AR on Android devices I would suspect why not relying on WebXR ?

Good morning, @sebavan:

First, thank you very much for your immediate response.

I think model-viewer is the way to go if you want AR running on the web, these days.

In addition has as you know a really terrific on-the-fly USDZ model generation. Two birds with one stone, here.

Sadly, WebXR has a much worse performance compared to AR native support (ARCore or ARKit/QuickLook), at least with model-viewer.

Best regards.

I would say WebXR is the way to go for AR as soon as you want a customized experience.

Are you speaking about the first web 3d part of the experience or the immersive one ?

Hi there @sebavan:

About your second question, the webapp part of the project is well covered with BabylonJS.

Is when passing to AR, where we prefer the “model-viewer” way. As you know model-viewer offers also WebXR (webxr mode) as a way to drive the AR experience, and yes, it is more flexible about customization, a basic GUI, …; but at the end of the day, the native performance (ar mode) is better by far.

Here the people making “the HW specifications” call all the shots, I’m afraid.

And furthermore, you have the problem with Safari making “apple” things (and FF also here):

(forgive me for the off-topic)

Best regards.

Thanks a ton, I love this invaluable info !!! I ll be sure sure to share it with browsers teams when I ll speak with them in the new year.

Good morning @sebavan:

We really appreciate your words… and Merry Christmas from Spain.