I just had an online interview for a job in environment design and I said that I was working with PBR in Blender cycles. It’s not correct because it’s BSDF, but there are a lot of similarities in the nodal system.
Should I send a little erratum or is it a minor mistake and not worthy enough to be mentioned
Yep, right: BSDFs are mathematical models for surface appearance, which are used in physically based shading systems (aka PBR) to define shaders.
The main difference between Cycles and realtime engines that are advertised as having PBR is that in Cycles you can buils your own node graph, while realtime engines usually have a fixed shader where you can only tweak teytires and parameters.
Lots of people like the workflow “PBR” game engines have with a fixed shader that you just add textures and tweak parameters on. Plus tools like Substance are designed around exporting to such a shader. So lots of people have made node groups to try and emulate such a shader in Cycles.
Yep, that’s pretty much it - a “PBR node” would be one of these canned shaders that game engines use - nothing fancy, just kind of like a node group.
As for adding such a node to Cycles, that’s one of my longer-term projects - my current goal is to have one physically correct material (which would also answer your NK metal question) and one artist-control-oriented node (the Disney BSDF model looks pretty neat for that).