1.0

On the front page of ReShade.me there is a link to previous versions. You can still get ReShade+SweetFX from there. Other than that, SweetFX is integrated in the Framework since the start so you would not miss out anything if you go with the latest release. In metaphor its a bit like asking for a tire when someone gives you a complete car.

I will see to make a Framework / Mediator tutorial. Since the 1.0 changes I need to update the tutorial sections anyway

LuciferHawk wrote: In metaphor its a bit like asking for a tire when someone gives you a complete car.

But if I only want a tire for my current car, I have to remove it from the new car and put it on my old car, which means work.

I've tried the framework a few times for effects that are absent in ME, however it always resulted in serious performance drops. Besides I don't want the settings to be spread over multiple configuration files (I even merge the few files from ME for better editing).
Thus I'm not really a fan of the new all-in-one-package. It's not a big deal to extract the needed files, but you know, it doesn't have to be this way...

As said there is a link to previous versions.
In the worst case 100 ppl will give you 100 different requests of what they want thats why the framework is that flexible.

What no one wants (especially developers) is 76 shader in one file. Something that unstructured would also not work very well in a GUI.

Anyone can still get what they want but other than a bit more size the framework has only advantages for user and developer. It was created for that very reason, not to be a shader pack but to combine all possible shader packs. Dont see why some people want to make this a competition what is best when the very purpose is to go away with that...

You know, there may be some people who just don't want that whole package. Sometimes "the more the merrier" isn't the finest idea (think of those stupid codec packs)...
I appreciate what you guys are doing, you've put a lot work into the framework and surely it's getting better. However, I have no use for it currently and surely there are others who will miss the basic download. Somewhere on this forum crosire has stated that he, like me, prefers the kiss principle. This isn't kiss.
Like I said, not a big deal, but unpleasent.

Nothing stops you from removing everything you don't need from it. Open Pipeline.cfg and remove all the effects you don't want and then remove the matching config and shader files. If you only want SweetFX for instance, delete the GemFX, CustomFX and McFX folders and cfg files and remove all lines no containg SweetFX in Pipeline.cfg. Not that it brings you any benefits, but still possible.

brussell wrote: You know, there may be some people who just don't want that whole package. Sometimes "the more the merrier" isn't the finest idea (think of those stupid codec packs)...
I appreciate what you guys are doing, you've put a lot work into the framework and surely it's getting better. However, I have no use for it currently and surely there are others who will miss the basic download. Somewhere on this forum crosire has stated that he, like me, prefers the kiss principle. This isn't kiss.
Like I said, not a big deal, but unpleasent.

I don't think it's as bad as you make out. You do know that only the shaders you enable are compiled, regardless of section? So if you only add a few SweetFX shaders, it doesn't matter that GemFX or MeFX is included, they all get skipped. It even auto-detects which shaders you are using and disables those (like depth) that have an overhead if they're not being used, ensuring maximum performance. Finally, thanks to the framework, you can re-order shaders how you like for best effect, including most of the SweetFX ones, something you can't do with the original SweetFX only package (I know you're an ME user, but someone else earlier was lamenting the lack of a SweetFX package).

The only downside to the Framework is having to learn a new thing, but you had to learn SweetFX/MeFX/GemFX once upon a time too

Its also about us working together and if you want us work together or that we do the one man/developer show. The framework is an environment to work together as a team. It being modular is one of the things needed for that. Of course I could ha e created simply another GemFX pack but I for example want us to work in one project and thats called ReShade and the Framework of ReShade allows us to do that easly. We are not trying to compete but to cooperate.

When the first mediator came out, I felt lost and edited my stuff by changing the values in the config files itself only to find their structure different from before, I felt the same when I first used GEMFX configurator way back then, lost I mean, but got used to it eventually and passed to like it. But then again, I feel this way about all new things that are new to me hah

If I can recall well, the only time that I didn't feel overwhelmed with a kind of configurator, was with the very old one from FXAA, and my first one, that's probably why. After that I heard about SFX and I found that editing the values in files instead of some sliding bars to be hard. But I got used to it and also addicted, after years doing things this way, the mediator was a change that I had to accept and now I am happy with it.

With the mediator, I no longer feel that people new to SFX would be lost by editing values there instead of opening each .txt without me having to explain a long rol of details. Hover over the mouse and a little explanation is shown, a few exceptions, yes, but almost of them are there.

I wrote that just to remember that everything is a question of getting used to, of allowing yourself to be used about something and then you will see that is not so hard, nor bad, as that change makes you feel.

Also, I miss that the old configurator stayed on the top of all windows. Perhaps a "pin to the top" button to its window would be good, Lucifer lol

I think some of you have misunderstood me. I'm not complaining about the framework or it's structure or it's collaborative aspect. Not at all. Also I don't want to use the framework with some specific effects only.
I'm using a modifed ME release (standalone) on top of ReShade and want the configuration as simple and small as possible (off course I know that only used effects get compiled and it makes no difference perfomancewise).
So the deal (and its minor as I stated two times) is simply the download of a >20MB package, when all that I (and maybe others) want are the two dll's (or respectively for develovers: dll's + simple Reshade.fx). Nothing more, nothing less.

@Wicked Sick, there is a float on top button on the main mediator tab. If you did not create a preset yet (and the preset tutorial text is still there) its just behind it. Move there with the mouse and it will become visible.
Crosire told me actually that it might be too hidden but after the tutorial text is gone it will perfectly fit into that place

@Brussell, the Framework is also and in particular for developers. Point is not to reinvent the wheel (/shader) and to provide an implementation that can be used by everyone in the same environment. It would be best if all developed ReShade shader are compatible with the ReShade Framework. There is no reason why it should not be.
To the 20MB, I would have understood that 10 years ago but its 2015 and updates to the framework/reshade are usually released once a month or less.

On a side note, there have been ideas and plans to make the framework run in a more modular way where the core will be downloaded and within the mediator you can select shader from a database which will be downloaded on demand. This would shrink the size but its not gonna happen right now cause there are a few concerns that I discussed with Crosire. However, I think one way or the other we might end up there. Important now is to have users and developers on board of the idea using a framework.

I apologize, brussell. I really did understand you wrong, I am so sorry.

Lucifer would you mind responding to this when you have time?

reshade.me/forum/troubleshooting/1009-the-pin-to-the-top-button

i just download the latest reshade 1.0 framework and got a feeling that it's getting more complicated for me
not really means offend but i guess i should express what i really feels , thx for reading in advance

i've been using this kind of image enhance tools quite long time since injectFXAA, if someone still remembers
and then sweetfx, and now reshade,
ususally i just use some basic shader like smaa, sharpen, curve, dfx or technicolor sometimes, and will try others shader for fun
what i mean is i usually don't wanna spent too much time in tweaking shader or effect, life just too short
the main reason i'm confused with reshade 1.0 is there's too many option, too many shader, and just complicated at the first glance..
i would wonder if there's anyone will using all those shader or most of it to get what they wants, and just imagine the combination of all and the time consuming works? reall, i'm just curious about that
so i think i'm stuck with reshade + sfx 2.0 for awhile then, and still thanks for everyone who put lots of hardwork to make it better, it's just me or few maybe, prefer the simplify ways.

because of i've been following it and really enjoy it for quite some time, so not a newbie anymore, this reply not meaning any dis-satisfication at all
just think i have to tell what i really feels, no more, no less, thank again=)

I know what you mean. When I was teaching in university, there have been many students with similar difficulties when being confronted with new things. They found many things too complicated at first glance, mostly because they blocked themself in their own mind by that very thought. Its the main reason people give up early. Of course ReShade is not as important to justify investing understanding time but I would yet suggest, give it a day or week and you might be rewarded just a teachers and students hint

In my field solutions usually appear at the end of the day while failing all 23 hours before

okay, sounds make sense, maybe i'm just jump to the conclusion too fast,
afraid of the strange , it's actually normal too,
will try to learn it when i got some more spare times, thanks

You are a teacher haha So cool xD

I am feeling the opposite back in the the days of the first injectors and Hayssam Keilany started to make The Ice series
I was converted from a console gamer to PC and joined Hayssam Keilany forum and started to tweak enbs for Gta IV.
But the Problem was that Enbs were only designed for Certain Games and not all!
So then Came along SweetFX and i was loving changing the Colour and what not of each game.
But now with Reshade + Framework i am over the moon and nearly never play through a game because
I spend most of the time trying out the different shaders in different combos to see what i get

Anyway i just wanted to stay thanks to all involved for this wonderful Reshade and Framework

Why is MasterEffect not included into Framework 1.0? It still has some features not present in Framework...

MonarchX wrote: Why is MasterEffect not included into Framework 1.0? It still has some features not present in Framework...

It is in Framework 1.0

I see that the maximum sharpen strength of "LumaSharpen" in the Mediator is blocked at the figure 3. In many games I put the sharpen in SweetFx even up to 8. Higher than 8 you cannot see anymore a difference. So I was wondering if LuciferHawk could maybe increase this setting to 8 in the Mediator. I play GTA V on LumaSharpen settings of 8 (strength) and 1.00 (clamp).

Mike Gous wrote: I see that the maximum sharpen strength of "LumaSharpen" in the Mediator is blocked at the figure 3. In many games I put the sharpen in SweetFx even up to 8. Higher than 8 you cannot see anymore a difference. So I was wondering if LuciferHawk could maybe increase this setting to 8 in the Mediator. I play GTA V on LumaSharpen settings of 8 (strength) and 1.00 (clamp).

Careful! You're gonna cut yourself! *Slaps knee in time with cymbal crash; fashions suit of armor from corn tortillas* But seriously, something you can try in the meantime is check out AdaptiveSharpen and Unsharp Mask within the Gauss shader which are both found in the CustomFx section. Max out both of those in addition to LumaSharpen and your eye sockets will be leaking pools of diced nanocubes in no time!

I've only just discovered those myself. Lumasharpen has been a mainstay of every preset I've made so far and I don't think I've heard anyone mention these new options. I'm curious if anyone else has used them and have any opinions to share?