So I I’ve run into an issue that I wouldn’t necessarily say is obscenely bad, but is a nuisance. I’m sure anyone who has experience working with the “WorldAlignedTexture” nodes knows exactly what I’m referring to. And those who don’t, I’m talking about how the “WorldAlignedTexture” nodes only accept TextureObjects as input. However this is problematic for me, because I use the node quite often on simple meshes or architectural texturing.
So I’m wondering if anyone has discovered some way to use texture parameters with WorldAligned nodes. Or If I’d just be better off working strictly on a tangent space/UVed workflow to allow for instancing.
Even though I can’t see why, I’m certain Epic has a good reason why only TextureObjects are compatible, but I’d hate to think that there’d be any reason compelling enough to convince Epic to make something of this nature entirely impossible to do.
And please feel free to condemn me if there’s some glaringly obvious way to do that I didn’t pick up on, don’t worry I’m a big boy (:
Also, in the event that there really is no way to create effective manner in which to create quality material instances from “WorldAligned” materials (for lack of a better term). Would I see a significant difference in performance between using the typical tangent UV-coordinate workflow or should I just stick with making a bunch of separate “WorldAligned” Materials. (I know that the material instancing option will almost always be cheaper performance wise, but I’m wondering is the difference significant enough to completely eliminate such a workflow from my repitoire, or would it make more sense to use it, but sparingly?)
Thank you to all who have taken the time to read this.