Testing the Layermix TOP I found that it’s a super useful tool to composite multiple layers. One very cool addition could be the possibility to stop the cooking of the bypassed content, which it doesn’t do a the moment. Right now we still need to do the usual add a switch TOP before with another node like a blank constant to stop the cooking of the bypassed sequence.
You can see in the image, top and bottom are exactly the same, layermix with bypass on the second input, but in the bottom version, I added a blank constant+switch so the second input doesn’t cook
1 Like
I’m very glad you’re finding the Layer Mix TOP useful.
We’ll add an RFE for further consideration. Thank you for the suggestion.
this is super needed. is there a reason why it doesnt act this way?
I tried doing some expression for the on/off bypass switch so that it is off when opacity is < 0.01 but it seemingly crashed touch when i togled the opacity slider…(EDIT- i geuss the paramters dont exsist if its ‘on’)
this node is goat but we need that extra level of optimization!!!
1 Like
Hi @REM_Visuals and @ben_carrier_mf
The latest official release will stop cooking inputs if they’re bypassed. You can download from here: Download | Derivative
3 Likes
there aint bigger legends then the TD dev legends.
one thing though, how can i automate the bypass to happen when my opacity is at 0.
i tried refrencing the opacity paramter in the bypass paramter, but it crashed TD.
essentially if something has 0 opacity it should be bypassed automaticlly no?
Hi @REM_Visuals
I’m able to reproduce the crash. We’ll look into it. Thank you for reporting it.
To clarify, the intended behavior is to disable the per-layer parameters if bypass is on, meaning if you set opacity to 0 and enable bypass, the opacity parameter would also disable. Would this fit your use case?
I guess the idea is, if a layer is at 0 opacity, it should automatically be bypassed/not cook cause it’s not visible.
If we don’t have it by default or built in, then we should be able to have an expression on the bypass button that is something like “1 if me.par.opacity > 0.0001 else 0” - not sure if it’s opacity0 ,opacity1 etc…but you get the idea
Similar to a switch with a blend.
Thanks guys this node is such a godsend and is becoming more and more powerful!
Thanks for the clarification. We’ll make an RFE to further consider the bypass parameter.
As for a temporary workaround, you can set the Output Resolution menu parameter on the Common page to one of the following: Fit Resolution, Limit Resolution, Custom Resolution. This should allow you to avoid the hang you’re encountering with the bypass parameter. Let me know if you have any more questions.
Hey @REM_Visuals
The bugfix for the crashing bypass parameter will be in the next release. Thanks for reporting the bug.
1 Like
Of course thanks for squashing it!!
I still think the bypass should be applied by default when opacity is at 0, automatically.
I don’t see any use case where you would still want to cook a layer if it’s at 0 opacity.
But will def just use an expression for now.
We’re still internally discussing a few of the parameters of the Layer Mix TOP, including the bypass and opacity parameters. The main concern we see with stopping a layer from cooking is that it means the layer has no impact at all. It’s hard to guarantee that setting opacity to 0 means we can omit the layer entirely for every use case.
But opacity 0 would surely mean there’s no textural impact, I still don’t see a difference between bypass on and opacity 0. But maybe I’m missing some use cases.
I look at It like the switch top with blend set to on.When we are at a integer the other layer (before and After) stop cooking when we are floating between we are cooking.
That seems like that should be the default way a layer mix should work if we are aiming for optimization.
Hey @REM_Visuals
Opacity 0 layers will stop cooking in the next release. Thanks for the RFE.
1 Like
Have i mentioned you guys are modern day gods???
Thanks guys!
Haha, thanks a lot. Hope you’ll find it useful 
