🧵 Smothing objects.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 15:45:57 UTC No. 972553
I remember seeing a YT video about some technology that used something to create real smooth shapes (not graphics tricks) it was some old technology nearest field or sometihng.
I can not find this video...
Is there a way to easily make your 3D models smoother in REAL GEOMETRY not graphic tricks? If yes how?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 16:12:30 UTC No. 972559
you're thinking of sdf modelling, cris.
magica csg, substance modeller, that one blender addon that's in pre-alpha, houdini (lol).... the list could go on
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 17:42:24 UTC No. 972586
"nearest field" sounds like an SDF to me. Try this also:
https://www.youtube.com/@Clavicula
https://clavicula.link/
It's closed-source (I think) but free.
But if you're looking for a tool that automatically bevels all the edges of your mesh and returns very clean geometry so it looks like somebody actually competent made it, they haven't invented that yet, Cris.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 17:53:57 UTC No. 972592
Subdivision surfaces are real geometry. You simply subdivide until each face takes up an area of about 4 pixels on the render.
Blender / Cycles (Experimental) does that automatically if you use adaptive subdivision.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:25:09 UTC No. 972602
>>972559
>sdf modelling
Hmm thanks for the name.
I think it was this video only the guy explaining it was not a pajeet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5N
I think.
>>972586
>"nearest field" sounds like an SDF to me. Try this also:
Yea that video looks like that thing I remember a box being shown to be made smooth by drawing around it and in it.
>>972592
>Subdivision surfaces
Na Subsurface are cancer. They literally break if your topology is not specific more suited for 2D then 3D.
I simply wanted to make my para metrically modeled things in blender be smooth and not so sharp.
Anything other like that? When is it coming to blender? Or what do I use to make the items I make more smooth regardles of geometry/topology?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:36:00 UTC No. 972604
>>972602
>blender
There is your problem
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:48:03 UTC No. 972605
>>972602
>When is it coming to blender?
this fucking guy
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 18:55:03 UTC No. 972606
>>972604
>There is your problem
What program is the best for it?
https://youtu.be/s5NGeUV2EyU?t=202
I tihnk it is the video
>This scene I made in 2008
This hurts as a blender user.
What did he use to make it?
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:02:52 UTC No. 972607
>>972602
I have it in Blender because I've programmed it myself a couple years ago. But you could try do something in Geonodes. I've heard people do great stuff in Geonodes, you know... Influencers are enthusiatic about Geonodes, so...
Notice that when you convert an SDF into geometry you're going to use some variation of the Marching Cubes process. The alternative is to raymarch it, like Inigo Quilez does. See Shadertoy and/or tutorials by him for that.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:03:32 UTC No. 972608
>>972606
>What program is the best for it?
Not blender lol
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:06:51 UTC No. 972609
>>972608
>Not blender lol
That is no program named "Not blender lol"
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:22:12 UTC No. 972610
>>972609
Yeah
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:28:53 UTC No. 972612
>>972610
See this is why everyone hates anti-blender fagots.
When you ask them what to use they have no answer only shitpost.
Anonymous at Thu, 1 Feb 2024 19:50:02 UTC No. 972613
>>972612
Hi. Mike here from the office. I know you're a new recruit but you need to remember to read a couple posts above >>972559 >>972586 before you do your shilling thing. Otherwise you just look like a doofus.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 03:24:20 UTC No. 972686
>>972606
>What did he use to make it?
Shaders.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 14:14:01 UTC No. 972729
>>972686
>Shaders.
HUH?
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 15:52:10 UTC No. 972747
>>972553
holy shit its stonecold
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 17:58:13 UTC No. 972753
>>972607
>programmed it himself
>just posts picture of standard blender metaball types
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 18:48:57 UTC No. 972758
>>972753
Just try to make that shape with Metaballs. Just try it. And BTW the source code for the patch is here:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/sn
if you want it. You're going to have to recompile Blender 2.76b from source because it's not a Python script.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 18:54:10 UTC No. 972759
this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9V-
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 18:59:55 UTC No. 972760
>>972753
You can also watch these two short screen casts I've made:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9n
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDU
The reason they're called Metaballs in the UI is because I've substituted the original Metaballs formulas with similar SDF formulas, but I haven't changed the name. You'll notice that they work differently from metaballs and the UI is also somewhat different.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 19:02:03 UTC No. 972761
>>972759
Yes. Somewhat similar but I'm not that guy. My patch works specifically by taking over the existing Metaballs system, not as an add-on or via Geometry Nodes.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 19:04:54 UTC No. 972762
Also please please do not subscribe or unsubscribe from my youtube channel because my youtube username is @sukmadink69 and I have 69 subscribers. It's perfection as it is. Please don't ruin it.
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 20:13:55 UTC No. 972777
>>972762
Buy an ad fag
Anonymous at Fri, 2 Feb 2024 20:31:36 UTC No. 972779
>>972777
You're just afraid because when I'll eventually reach 69 videos on my channel the ritual will be complete and things are never going to be the same.
Anonymous at Sat, 3 Feb 2024 10:03:24 UTC No. 972829
>>972759
What is this guy even doing?
He waves his mouse around in the menu like it is 2007 and starts modeling.
OK. Is the a build in add on?
OR did he download it?
How exactly does it work?
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 3 Feb 2024 10:31:40 UTC No. 972833
it is an experimental feature, in the video he uses it with the edit mode to model that way, you have to enable it in preferences > interface > developer extras > experimental > new node volumes, and after that you have to "code" the tool with geometry nodes, here you have a basic implementation, in Italian, but it is easy to follow.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBS
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Feb 2024 11:28:30 UTC No. 972956
>>972833
>and after that you have to "code" the tool with geometry nodes
Ah yes the missing explanations (that the idiot did not show)
> here you have a basic implementation, in Italian, but it is easy to follow.
Thanks. I try it or wait for the full feature.
>Geometry nodes.
Am I the only one who hates geometry nodes?
mos of what they are used for is useless or art (wow my fractal nonsense function created this train) and 9/10 simply using standard blender modifiers is faster and better especially if these modifiers finally got updated and not be stuck in 2004.
Also geometry nodes feel like cancer incarnate where actually using a PROGRAMING language would be better.
Especialy when loop are needed.
>Plug the same box into the copy of the same box into the copy of the same box 10 times to have it repeat 10 times.
>Want more?
>Repeat this shit
Wow it is like the array modifier only more retarded! And takes x100 times longer to make!
And the "repeat zone sounds like pure cancer" I wait until these retards finally make geometry nodes actually usable instead of a burden.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Feb 2024 13:30:23 UTC No. 972962
>>972956
>I try it or wait for the full feature.
it lacks of a chamfer tool and the workflow is a shitfest because the nodes, it could be great as parametric modeling tool but it is not because it is fucking blender, you can follow the development here https://projects.blender.org/blende
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgw
https://github.com/ephtracy/ephtrac
>Am I the only one who hates geometry nodes?
Geometry nodes are shit, they could be great if the program had useful examples packed instead of just the fucking nodes but who needs examples .....
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Feb 2024 13:41:17 UTC No. 972963
>>972956
>I try it or wait for the full feature.
it lacks of a chamfer tool and the workflow is a shitfest because the nodes, it could be great as parametric modeling tool but it is not because it is fucking blender, you can follow the development here https://projects.blender.org/blende
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgw
https://github.com/ephtracy/ephtrac
>Am I the only one who hates geometry nodes?
Geometry nodes are shit, they could be great if the program had useful examples packed instead of just the fucking nodes but who needs examples .....
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 4 Feb 2024 13:58:03 UTC No. 972966
>>972956
>I try it or wait for the full feature.
it lacks of a chamfer tool and the workflow is a shitfest because the nodes, it could be great as parametric modeling tool but it is not because it is fucking blender, you can follow the development here https://projects.blender.org/blende
>Am I the only one who hates geometry nodes?
Geometry nodes are shit, they could be great if the program had useful examples packed instead of just the fucking nodes but who needs examples .....
Anonymous at Sun, 4 Feb 2024 19:37:26 UTC No. 972999
>>972966
>they could be great
I literally fail to see the use for them.
It would be better if it was shown how to use python to program something together.
>because it is fucking blender
I know people here hate on blender for no reason whatsoever. However I think I have legitimate criticisms of blender.
Blender looks like it runs after the meme of the year and then pushes it out and forgets about it.
This was most seen with grace pencil.
Hyped beyond belief. Ends up being fucken retardation on the level of a tracer (have fun drawing with this and have normal shapes who fill things normally not needing to trace pictures you got from other things.) I was hyped for the sculpting of your drawings however it is literally retarded since after moving there is nothing like a remesher so you lose geometry forever.
Remember when everyone did suck dynotopos dick? And now pretends like dynotopo does not exist?
Looks like after something is introduced it is forgotten by everyone.
Blender could improve if they actually concentrated on updating things that are literally stuck in the 90s to this day.
LIKE:
>Lattis editing.
No way to use selections liek in normal edit mode. Literally from the 90s.
>Array modifier
They can give it more options like adding a random offset to get some chaotic placement to the array. However nope, write for 60 minutes retarded node shit to get this thing.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Feb 2024 16:33:34 UTC No. 973080
>>972833
I literally do not have a SDF volume node in blender 4.0
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:07:06 UTC No. 973083
>>973080
I think they remove the experimental things in the releases, download a daily build
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ft
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:07:51 UTC No. 973085
The cool thing about SDFs is that you can make unusual shapes that are kind of impossible to make any other way. But you also need to have fun while composing them. You can't let Geometry Nodes get in the way of your workflow.
If my pipeline get interrupted by some nodes technical issues, then I go into "why am I even doing this" mode and in the end absolutely nothing gets done.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:10:46 UTC No. 973087
>>973085
How can I make SDFs?
I tried the tutorial however I do not have these nodes in the most new version.
Anonymous at Mon, 5 Feb 2024 17:46:56 UTC No. 973091
>>973087
I don't know about nodes. Ton appeared in my dreams one night. He stared at me in silence for a minute, then he stroke his beard and then he blessed me. In the morning I was able to do stuff like this with ease.
Anonymous at Fri, 16 Feb 2024 11:23:50 UTC No. 974287
got sent here from the blender thread, my original post >>974254
my goal was to have a tool like the one in Dreams on the PS4 of all things, where it works like a combination of booleans and metaballs. pic related is from me fucking about it in back in the day, very easy to create stuff similar to >>973085, can be done in under a minute
https://www.youtube.com/live/q8iJpb
https://youtu.be/pNcv6QtUcmA?si=IfW
Substance 3D modeler seems pretty close. anyone got experience with it that knows if it's similar?
https://youtu.be/HkVReuxEpq4?si=rGF
Anonymous at Sat, 17 Feb 2024 09:17:15 UTC No. 974364