There is no one working on UDIM or PTEX so it’s a bit of a long shot feature request. You could always go the Ocean modifier route find a Blender developer who knows Cycles, Blender Internal and UVs, raise a bunch of money and pay them to implement it. I would definately chip in for something like that.
Fund raising to get features into Blender used to happen a lot more four or five years but it’s dead down a bit, I think there where drives for the compositor, smoke, ocean modifier, bmesh etc.
I like about everything that is planned for 2.8, but I have one small suggestion:
Change the name of Grease Pencil to something else! Functionality, purpose and about everything else is changed in this tool, and it is becoming a big part of some user’s Blender workflow to create and animate stuff. It’s not anymore a reference, planning or educational support tool. It is one of the tools.
My suggestion is simple: Pencil.
In future tutorials, people would say: “…and now I use pencil tool…” or “…I’m drawing with pencil…”
I hope you get the idea.
please have this, please have that… 
please have this thread follow more of this, here a page where you can follow this 2.8 development
https://www.miikahweb.com/en/blender/git-statistics/branches/blender2.8
About UDIM, I don’t want to give anyone too high hopes, but I did do some tests a while back. Since I also looked into image layer support let me tell you that I feel like the biggest challenges in those project are actually image handling and drawing (rendering). By which I mean in both cases current drawing is slow as hell, loading four (4) 4k UDIM tiles bring Blender to its knees, just like having more than one layer in the image layer branch. Supporting painting UDIM in the UV image editor shouldn’t be too hard from my first glance at the code, the bulk of it would be choosing the right UDIM tile based on the UV coordinates of the stroke. The 3D view sounds a bit more challenging.
Anyways, image handling is the bottleneck here. I can sum up my observations in a wili post for other developers, especially considering the fact that almost the same code is used for movies (the MovieCache struct et al.).
In my test, the idea would be to have a separate editor for UV editing and texture painting, leaving the current image editor to be a simple image viewer to inspect renders and so on. This is to also have separate logic when it comes down to small things like image aspect ratio, for texturing most of the time you would use a square image, so the editor should enforce that. (And we’ll have cleaner code too.)
Here’s a quick video of said test:
Light linking with per object, per layer, per group settings would be great (exclude/include).
Nice KWD, I hope you will be abble to succeed ^^
What’s amazing with that slide is that a sizable animation studio actually sees Blender as having advanced to the point where they drop Maya altogether (it’s not Pixar or Dreamworks, but they are not some tiny 1 to 3 man operation either).
If you told someone that studios would abandon Maya for Blender 10 years ago, they would’ve dismissed that as crazy fantasy (because of the reputation that FOSS had among professionals).
ooops wrong thread…
god I feel like an idiot now…
Ace what are you referring to ?
On the first part, the slide posted by Soul.
On the second part, the early years of this forum (back when this was still Elysiun) was filled with threads of Blender users opining that the professional world was neither taking them nor the Blender app. seriously (because a lot of basic features were missing and the commercial apps. were lightyears ahead, even including the mid-tier solutions like Carrara). Of course part of it was provoked by their grandiose proclamations on how Blender was starting to take over the world of CG (since fanboy behavior was a major component of the community)
I honestly don’t know their full rationale for why they decided to abandon Maya, but I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of studios looking at (and using) Blender are excited for 2.8 and the willingness of the BF to work with those who hired developers (especially with the promise of major bugbears like the weak viewport code being gone). That statement is based on the fact that we haven’t heard much about sponsored development until after the 2.8 initiative was announced (which was roughly at the time of last year’s conference).
@Ace Dragon Not the whole truth yes, but in that talk the guy mentioned, that they are saving the Maya and other software license fees and paying that money to Cycles/Blender developers of their own. He has been in Maya wagon very long time, so his opinion really matters, I think.
That’s what I figured, I wouldn’t be surprised if more studios started redirecting license money towards the development of features they need in Blender if they find a decent chance of said features getting into master (with the secondary effect of them becoming available for everyone).
When mentioning that, that would assume the features are implemented properly (and if they are blocked the main reason being the need to refactor one or more of the underlying systems).
Looks great. We definitely need a way to define tile sizes without a texture though. Mari has a great UDIM system that I think we’d be wise to borrow from.
Blender Developer Meeting Notes for Sunday 6th November 2016 https://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2016-November/047838.html
Hi everyone,
Here are the notes from today’s 16 CET / 15 UTC meeting in irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
NOTE: daylight saving ended, meeting is 1 hour later!
- Blender 2.78a
The ‘a’ update was released before the conference.
All fine so far, minor regression bugs were reported. We’ll check this next week.
- Other projects and 2.8
- Follow-ups on Blender Conference will be done by Ton Roosendaal this week. That includes news on
the 101 project, OpenCL, the workflow workshop and about how to get more devs onboard.
- Meeting confirms (and agrees) to move all new development to the 2.8 branch.
That means we give it highest priority to make that branch updated and usable.
- Some decisions then also have to be made, about putting back particles, about BI render, BGE, etc.
This can be kept an open discussion topic for the coming weeks.
Meeting tends to agree on just keeping most of it for now, including OpenCOLLADA.
- Last weekend of November is a ‘workflow’ workshop in Amsterdam, with the core UI team
and a number of active contributors (half developers, half artists). That workshop can come with proposal for
the feature list of 2.8 (compatibility and breakage).
Workshop agenda and discussion will start on the bf-interface list this week.
https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:Doc/Contact
Laters,
-Ton-
Looks like 2.7x is finally coming to the end of the line judging from those notes (so now the devs. have freedom to break stuff in order to put a number of Blender’s remaining weaknesses to bed).
Hopefully the particles can make a quick return as it would be rather difficult to make a number of scene types without them (at least until the new system finally gets to a state where it gets replaced altogether).
So… no 2.79 (even with only minor changes) ?
No, the current agreement is no decision on 2.79 this year. Should be done in a meeting in January next year.
Blender Developer Meeting Notes for Sunday 13th November 2016 https://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-committers/2016-November/047846.html
i everyone,
Here are the notes from today’s 16 CET / 15 UTC meeting in
irc.freenode.net #blendercoders.
- Blender 2.78a
Nothing new so far, ‘b’ release question is still undecided.
- Other projects and 2.8
- OpenGL code modernization: work is good so far, but the team could
still use more developers’ help (see
https://developer.blender.org/T49043 and
wiki.blender.org/index.php/Dev:2.8/Source/OpenGL/Immediate_Mode_Replacement_Tasks
to get involved).
- Dalai Felinto will publish first Layers design proposal next week (it
will incorporate both the layermanagement and viewport projects).
- Mike Erwin is working closely with AMD on Vulkan + Blender designs for
new ‘low-level’ graphic system.
- Lukas Töenne reports he has picked up work from Kevin Dietrich on the
Cycles’ volume/openvdb rendering.
Cheers,
Bastien
Commits logs seem to show both Campbell and Lukas Tonne getting back into development to an extent (Lukas switching gears to OpenVDB integration with KWD and Campbell doing what he usually does).
A good welcome back to both of them then 
