specular_tint?

[portsmouth]

@brechtvl wrote:

For non-physical color multiplier like specular_color and transmission_color (with depth 0), we called those "tint" instead of "color" to make a more clear distinction with the physical ones like base_color.

[portsmouth]

Agree that specular_color would work better as specular_tint. This would nicely tie with the F82-tint model for the conductor as well, where this color specifies F82 as a tint of the Schlick reflectance. This also distinguishes it from coat_color, which does not tint the coat highlight (it colors the substrate lobe due to absorption in the coat).

[portsmouth]

@peterkutz wrote:

For non-physical color multiplier like specular_color and transmission_color (with depth 0), we called those "tint" instead of "color" to make a more clear distinction with the physical ones like base_color.

Makes sense. We almost did that in ASM too. I forget why we didn't.

[virtualzavie]

This didn't make consensus during our meeting discussion, as it's not clear where the distinction is between "color" and "tint", so we decided to not change and keep using "color".

[brechtvl]

Ok, it was only a minor suggestion, I guess this issue can be closed.