SeanMartin posted at 8:09PM Mon, 06 January 2020 - #4375476

Probably a minor thing, but it would be nice to have lights that, in preview, do a better job of mirroring what's actually going to happen in render.

That's a big part of PBR's advantage, why so many now want it. By conserving light energy, all of your materials are going to look more natural (as in real, not necessarily correct) off the bat. And then it's just getting a few parameters correct to approximate the specific material. Right now it's possible to increase material values so they return more light energy than is in the environment. You can have e.g a light set to 50% but have a material that reflects 100% specular, 80% diffuse, and perhaps also has an ambient value. In Firefly a rendered pixel of that material could return more light than (100 spec + 80 diffuse + x ambient / 2 ) is hitting it. In Cycles a non-emissive material can't return more light than is hitting it. Not wanting to confuse Cycles with a PBR viewport, but it should be easier to simplify Cycles materials to one of the two common PBR variants as the materials are already physically correct. I don't know. I don't see how Poser can ever have eevee as it's GPL (Cycles is Apache license I believe). There are other commercial options, so no reason to automatically assume a PBR viewport would have to be found elsewhere. Marmoset's viewport comes to mind as a non-competing, non-game engine, PBR viewport. iClone has a nice viewport but is probably now in direct competition with Poser, while Unity/UE seem content with their current business models. (I'm not sure that a game engine couldn't actually be used with a proper commercial license that gave access to the source code, depends on the pricing of course. A typical AAA game probably sells many more copies in a short time than a niche creative tool.)