I understand why you would want to name it that way, but this does make the post misleading.
Also, if you’re interested in what ray-tracing actually looks like, there’s a very intuitive and easy-to-understand video on YouTube about it. However, I will warn you now: there’s a reason true ray-tracing has not been made on Roblox. Doing this is very memory intensive.
We read it. The issue is the title says “RT” which stands for ray-tracing. The post gets viewed because of it’s title. By saying “it’s not RT” on the actual post will dismiss some people, seeing the title was misleading.
… You could literally just make an asset pack. This isn’t called a shader, this is called lighting settings. Anyone can make this. ._.
Why do you have hardware requirements, it’s literally just base Roblox.
it’s pretty but it seems more efficient to drop an .rbxm of instances as there doesn’t seem to be any user-configurable options before the script instantiates them anyways. It would be a nifty timesaver if you implemented some configurables or even took this concept into plugin format with sliders to help those unfamiliar with tweaking lighting achieve some good looking stuff with simple toolage
for i, v in pairs(Lighting:GetChildren()) do
if v then
v:Destroy()
end
end
is equivalent to game:GetService("Lighting"):ClearAllChildren()
minor nitpick but if Vignette == true then is the same as if Vignette then
I don’t see why you would ask for credit for something like this, as it is simply a script that implements lighting settings, which is easily achievable.
There is no point in using ipairs, because the only difference between the two is that ipairs will stop when it reaches a nil value, which is impossible to get in a table from :GetChildren.
You don’t even need to use pairs and ipairs anymore because of the (relatively) new generalized iteration:
for Index, Object in workspace:GetChildren() do
-- New string interpolation feature too!
-- https://devforum.roblox.com/t/2127058
print(`{Object.Name} is very cool!`)
end