Why was rounded corners "direct" input removed?

[Monkeybrother]

I'm sorry if this has been asked before, couldn't find a specific thread.

I just started my first real project (for a client) using Corona, and have been learning the specifics. Why was the rounded corners setting removed from the material tab? It was very handy and it's just cumbersome to have a map in the bump slot, especially if you have another bump map. This is one thing that I thought I wouldn't have to do when switching from V-Ray and that I like about the Modo internal renderer. I'm a bit disappointed.

[Juraj]

I believe because the map expanded its options. If it stayed inside mat properties, it would be too bloated with those other options. (it's now mappable, allows exceptions/conditions,etc.. )

But yes, it was quite convenient.

[Ondra]

I believe because the map expanded its options. If it stayed inside mat properties, it would be too bloated with those other options. (it's now mappable, allows exceptions/conditions,etc.. )

But yes, it was quite convenient.

that, plus you can now put it inside the bump slot of shadowcatcher, standard mtl, physical mtl, ... and it made no sense internally to keep it as integral part of material - it made the design slower and more ugly internally

[Monkeybrother]

that, plus you can now put it inside the bump slot of shadowcatcher, standard mtl, physical mtl, ... and it made no sense internally to keep it as integral part of material - it made the design slower and more ugly internally

I get your point as a programmer, but as an end user it's a step backward. Yesterday I hade to clean up and put materials on a very large and complex model coming from revit, and the bump map thing made the process a lot slower and a lot more boring. And, again, as an end user, the materials get a lot uglier (in the workflow sense, not visually) with the current solution. What I liked about Corona was that you could breeze through stuff that would take ages in V-Ray, and this smudges that a bit.
Would it be possible to have some sort of compromise? A tool that adds the rounded edges to the bump slot and combines it with the existing bitmap, if present?

Meanwhile, what is the best practice to put the rounded edge map together with a bitmap bump map?

[Ondra]

Juraj listed the reasons from users perspective - we would not make the change if it made sense only from programmer perspective, not users. You can easily combine the two maps just by putting the bump map first, then adding the rounded edges map to the already occupied slot, and clicking "keep od map as submap"

[Juraj]

Yup, the rounded + other bump is not issue at all, that's what the slot is there for.

A simple script could be made to populate materials with this map if you want to apply it to whole Revit models (I do too).

I actually made similar complaint when this happened, but the fact is, the current solution is much more logical. When you look at all the more advanced shading systems (like Unreal 4), they are even more modular. There are no features attached to basic properties of material, and everything has to be added. In flat (node graph) network, this difference would seem almost negligible from user perspective/workflow point, but we're kind of positively spoiled with the all-in-one type of shader legacy hauling back to 3dsMax roots, but if we want to have truly flexible shader that allows for every feature imaginable, those features need to be detached.

[TheDavid]

Add roundEdges to bump slot feature could be added in CoronaConverter in form of small button with option "use for selected". I prefer to chamfer everything but for people which love this feature this could save some time.

[Juraj]

I used to chamfer everything but then I took Revit to my kneecap..