Hehe by "counter-productive" I wasn't referring to the details of the workflow you describe - as said, combining modeling and sculpting is indeed the most productive way to work on organic hero assets and it boggles my mind that some artists might not be doing that.
What I was referring to is the expectation of finding exact equivalents tools/UX/workflow from one app to the next - that's just not the way these things work. Of course some evangelist fanboys will tell you that "you can do everything you need in this or that program" but you know very well that's never the case, so imho it is indeed pointless to go in hoping to exactly replicate a workflow from a different app. What you'll find will be sometimes worse, sometimes better - basically different.
And again the remarks on mouse vs stylus input are a irrelevant since this is just a matter of mapping what you want to what you want.
Lastly on performance : indeed it is far from great in some circumstances. Some aspects are getting way better (the custom 2.8 sculpt branch is mindblowing for raw sculpting), and some are still behind the times (editing geo of dense subdiv models not relying on marked bevels can be less than smooth). That's precisely where people like you can make the software better, by precisely documenting the issues and reporting them. Otherwise what's the point ?
Hey fellas, here's an idea / request for boolean visibility.
I use a simple toggle wires script to toggle the wireframe of the objects in my viewport on/off. However, I'd like to take this a step further: to any cutters visible in the scene (regular geo with its display type set to WIRE), make them vanish on/off too.
I believe the quickest way would be to toggle the Show in Viewport property of cutter objects (bpy.context.object.hide_viewport = NOT bpy.context.object.hide_viewport), and the way to identify which objects would be by searching the ones with its Display type set to WIRE. Is this a smart and fast way to achieve this? Does anyone know how to smartly & efficiently do this without making the script take a heavy performance toll?
On a different topic : does anyone know of any addon allowing to replicate the basic BoxCutter workflow (cutting in boolean shapes using rectangles/circles/polylines in screen space) but without all of the overhead of the recent versions BoxCutter ?
The 2.8+ iterations of BC are as powerful as ever but the addon is becoming seriously bloated compared to what the tool once was (it has a UI button to "activate it" but no button to switch it off ; and it now has dozens of options and modes). It is reaching a point where I have to constantly disable/enable the add-on for it not to get in the way and that defeats the whole purpose. I've tried a few other ones but I would welcome any suggestion. Thanks !
There is the built-in Carver addon, you need to enable it first
Believe me, when i discovered the possibilities of polysculpting modelling, i said to myself: i won't go back. Going back to the old and prehistoric modelling methods would be really counter-productive in my opinion.
Well, what you're calling Polysculpting is just regular sub-d modeling with the addition of some sculpting brushes. I've been doing this for years in Max, but didn't feel the need to name it as it is nothing special. I'm not knocking your workflow, it's great that it's working so well for you, but you're completely dismissing it in Blender because you have to press a hotkey to jump between sculpt/edit. I agree, it's disappointing that the basic sculpt tools(especially grab/smooth) are not available in Edit Mode, but that's how it works so I don't mind pressing a hotkey(something I do 100s of times every day non-stop while working) to avail of those extra tools and that workflow.
As for your issues with your Wacom, I really don't understand this at all. From day one in Blender I've been using a Maya nav setup, and just last week I set my nav to Zbrush Right-Click nav as I started experimenting with Blender's sculpting tools. Just remap your Wacom properties per-app. Simple.
@ant1fact, @musashidan - Oh, thanks ! Fluent is way too much of a specialized tool for what I need, but Carver is *exactly* what I was looking for. Interesting to see that other users felt a similar need for a return to barebones Boxcutter, to a point of getting it to be part of the official release.
Well, what you're calling Polysculpting is just regular sub-d modeling with the addition of some sculpting brushes. I've been doing this for years in Max, but didn't feel the need to name it as it is nothing special. I'm not knocking your workflow, it's great that it's working so well for you, but you're completely dismissing it in Blender because you have to press a hotkey to jump between sculpt/edit. I agree, it's disappointing that the basic sculpt tools(especially grab/smooth) are not available in Edit Mode, but that's how it works so I don't mind pressing a hotkey(something I do 100s of times every day non-stop while working) to avail of those extra tools and that workflow.
"just regular sub-d modeling with some sculpting brushes"? seriously o.0? did you think well what you said? what a way to belittle! envy maybe?
If you really were doing things like that in Max, you would not be saying such things. Lies, that's all.
It seems you don't use/know modo, that's sure at 10000%. Heh, "regular sub-d modeling and some sculpting brushes". You make me smile.
About the edit mode you say me: "but that's how it works". Sorry, but is not valid for me because i'm not a conformist. If i can't adapt the software to me, i say: "bye bye, there are 100 times better options". Blender may be free, but it doen't reach the level of productivity and efficiency i'm customed with. And I'm not dismissing anything. If i can't do a fucking bevel while pinching, inflating, carving, etc. then, Blender doesn't serve me for modelling, hard surfaces or organic, whatever. It's as simple as that. You don't need to complicate things unnecessarily.
I remapped the keys to a Maya style, i modified the modelling tools with a bunch of add-ons and keymaps, and i tried several combinations more, in order to have a better workflow. But i didn't end with something comfortable, without broking other aspects of the program i really liked. I invested too much time for nothing.
Furthermore, for my wacom digital pen i use a keymap i won't change for Blender, not for anything. I did hundreds of changes in modo, and i didn't need to touch my wacom properties/key maps.
"just regular sub-d modeling with some sculpting brushes"? seriously o.0? did you think well what you said? what a way to belittle! envy maybe?
If you really were doing things like that in Max, you would not be saying such things. Lies, that's all.
It seems you don't use/know modo, that's sure at 10000%. Heh, "regular sub-d modeling and some sculpting brushes". You make me smile.
Furthermore, for my wacom digital pen i use a keymap i won't change for Blender, not for anything. I did hundreds of changes in modo, and i didn't need to touch my wacom properties/key maps.
Yeah, mate, that's it, I'm envious..... grow up for fuck sake. I watched your video and what I see is sub-d modeling with the use of sculpting brushes to add a freeform element. If there's more to it then I'd love to hear about it. I love seeing new workflows. I'll put your rudeness and arrogance down to a language barrier thing. ¿Vale?
Yes, we all love our custom set ups and workflows that we're used to. It can be hard to leave that behind and start again. We all get that. We all sympathise. No need to get your knickers in twist. I've been using Max for 15 years, customised to the limits. I tried Blender 2.80. I fell in love. I decided that even though it was going to be hard at first to adopt a new workflow, I thought it was worth it. The workflow still isn't there yet. It's a work in progress, but that's to be expected - going from a program you know inside out and with your eyes closed to a program that you know nothing about. I didn't expect it to be an effortless transition, but I persevered. Welcome to the wonderful world of 3D.
You don't want to change your Wacom? That's your decision. Nobody is insisting. Maybe learning Blender isn't for you. Stay in Modo if the thoughts of Blender are leading to aggressive behaviour. It's probably best for your health. It's not worth bursting a blood vessel over. Tranquilo, mi amigo.
@musashidan You were quite a max evangelist for some time, so I'm wondering from your perspective what made you decide to make the switch/learn to Blender?
@musashidan You were quite a max evangelist for some time, so I'm wondering from your perspective what made you decide to make the switch/learn to Blender?
I haven't made the switch. I'm still on Max day to day for work. Still on the Max beta. Initially, I decided to learn Blender for 2 reasons: baking the bevel shader to normal maps, and look dev of MikkT baked assets.
However, I soon became addicted and have been exploring it more and more. Also, being on the Max beta for the last few years has been disappointing in some ways and 2.80 just felt like a very exciting prospect for the future of where things might go in the next few years. Then we saw the Epic news, the Embark Studios story, and just recently, we heard that Ubisoft AAA - one of the most hardcore Max studios and standard bearers since their founding in the 1990s - are migrating their pipeline to a Blender/Houdini workflow. This was huge for me and was pretty much a deciding factor(on top of Epic/Embark/Nvidia/etc) in why I see Blender playing a significant role in the games industry in the coming years. FOMO is real!!
I believe the quickest way would be to toggle the Show in Viewport property of cutter objects (bpy.context.object.hide_viewport = NOT bpy.context.object.hide_viewport), and the way to identify which objects would be by searching the ones with its Display type set to WIRE. Is this a smart and fast way to achieve this? Does anyone know how to smartly & efficiently do this without making the script take a heavy performance toll?
@Justo Looping through all objects in the scene should be extremely fast, you can do it with hundreds and not notice a pause.
I'd need to confirm this again, but I think an alternative way to hide objects would be to make a collection, disable its visibility, then add objects to it by script. You can then toggle the collection visibility as needed (provided one or more objects aren't hidden on other collections, since that hidden state should take priority).
<code>bpy.data.collections['AllCutters']<br>... cutterCollection.objects.link(bpy.context.active_object) # Add object to the cutter collection. ... cutterCollection.hide_viewport = not cutterCollection.hide_viewport cutterCollection =
@Blaizer maybe I missed something, but if you're in Edit mode and then switch to Sculpt mode, the Tab key becomes a toggle between these two modes. You can easily swap between poly-editing in Edit mode and then Tab > start brushing the form.
You use this a lot when making a character.
The cost of switching in and out of Sculpt mode in this case becomes a single press of Tab, just as if it were another tool in Edit mode (it's not, but if feels like it).
Yeah, mate, that's it, I'm envious..... grow up for fuck sake. I watched your video and what I see is sub-d modeling with the use of sculpting brushes to add a freeform element. If there's more to it then I'd love to hear about it. I love seeing new workflows. I'll put your rudeness and arrogance down to a language barrier thing. ¿Vale?
Yes, we all love our custom set ups and workflows that we're used to. It can be hard to leave that behind and start again. We all get that. We all sympathise. No need to get your knickers in twist. I've been using Max for 15 years, customised to the limits. I tried Blender 2.80. I fell in love. I decided that even though it was going to be hard at first to adopt a new workflow, I thought it was worth it. The workflow still isn't there yet. It's a work in progress, but that's to be expected - going from a program you know inside out and with your eyes closed to a program that you know nothing about. I didn't expect it to be an effortless transition, but I persevered. Welcome to the wonderful world of 3D.
Nice ad hominem man, and you dare to call me "arrogant" when i was being objetive, showing a video with a different workflow i was trying to adapt in some way into blender. Relax.
You only see trees in the forest my friend. This love of yours with Blender have you really blind. That's the bad thing of forums, some people like you take all said words with ill will, animosity, and later.. they reply in a toxic and offensive way. You shouldn't be bothered if i say that i model in a easiest and fastest way in modo, you shouldn't debate/discuss me anything personal. First of all, for respect, something you lack heavily. So, passing on.
@Blaizer maybe I missed something, but if you're in Edit mode and then switch to Sculpt mode, the Tab key becomes a toggle between these two modes. You can easily swap between poly-editing in Edit mode and then Tab > start brushing the form.
You use this a lot when making a character.
The cost of switching in and out of Sculpt mode in this case becomes a single press of Tab, just as if it were another tool in Edit mode (it's not, but if feels like it).
Thanks for the concern @RN, but switching modes didn't help me at all using my Cintiq. And that's the main problem, Blender 2.8 is designed to be used with a mouse and its middle button/wheel. Any important change in the keymap will mess the other keymaps like a nuclear bomb.
I just want to use the pencil brushes to move, and edit like inflating or pinching, not the gizmos. I also wanted to be able to press a keymap/shortcut and do a simple bevel in sculptmode, like i do in Modo, but it's impossible, because we can't select the different elements such as polygons or edges.
TLDR : I can confirm that the fluid workflow you describe is 100% possible
But Pior said that, and later, other users said the contrary.
It should not be a problem, because the workflow is very very simple, and Blender has all the tools there. But it seems like Blender 2.8 can't do what i'm doing since year 2006. The actual Blender is for me like "to paint an illustration without tablet, just a mouse", it's like going back to year 2000. I tried it hard with Blender, very hard, but i'm doing things in a much better way, much faster and with 1000% more perfomance in Modo (and Modo is not precisely the best user friendly app in the world).
@Blazier@musashidan you might want to move this into pm? This starts to 'drift' if you know what I mean... @RN haven't had time to test you advice yet but sounds nice and I'll come back to it. thx!
@Blaizer chill dude, it was you who started belittling musashidan and using a condescending attitude. When you accuse others of being envious, saying it's lies all lies and using f-bombs, people are going to start ignoring you and think less of you. La manera en la que nos comunicamos puede afectar mucho a otras personas Alberto.
@RN That's it! I use HOps so all cutters are actually automatically sent already to a collection, so I should be able to only hide that. Thanks for the idea. Curiously enough, I notice that Blender allows the same object to be present multiple times inside the Outliner - inside a collection for example, and outside too. This causes problems with hiding objects, because if they are also present outside the collection, they will not be turned invisible. I know 2.81 did some changes to how Collections and Outliner works - was this addressed, or can objects still be present multiple times in Blender's newest version?
@Justo I didn't start anything. It was him who started belittling a modelling workflow he doesn't know of, adding adjetives such as "regular" to belittle all, and being really arrogant with this phrase: "I've been doing this for years in Max" when we all know is FALSE.
I had to say much more about the workflow i use, "polysculpting modelling" (he was upset with the name aswell), but with things like this.. he can go and figure it by himself.
Pues sí, a mi me afectó la manara en la que me respondió. A eso se le llama pura soberbia.
@rollin Sorry man. I don't pretend to derail the thread. But i can't stand when someone starts doing nonsense personal attacks, and moreover, when others opinions are not of their liking. That's fanatism.
Anyways, i won't reply anymore about the workflow Blender is unable to use.
@Blaizer Mate, I don't know what your problem is, but you should reread the posts. Your attitude is a disgrace. I don't have much time to come on here these days and I'm not going to waste any more of it on the likes of you. I've made close to 4000 replies on here, always to help people when I can, and funnily enough, I actually commended your use of workflow and asked for further explanation that I might be missing, agreed with you on the edit mode switching, and advised that remapping the Wacom has worked for me. I didn't 'belittle' anything. I merely stated - having actually taken time to watch the video you posted - that I didn't see anything special in your workflow that I haven't seen or done before. That's it. Your response was(and still is) to hurl abuse, insults, and accuse me of nonsense in the most childish of ways. I reiterate: grow up, mate. This forum is supposed to be a place of respect and respite from all the usual arsehole behaviour that we already have plenty of on other social media outlets.
@musashidan i could say the same as you, and much more things, but i pass. Right now, you are playing the role of the "victim" because you didn't measure your words. I'm customed to read toxic replies like yours, and i won't fall for provocations, so i won't waste more time in something i think is ended. Just keep using what you think is the best for you, and that's all. Blender is not good for me. End of discussion.
How do different objects with the Eevee node 'RGB from Shader' interact with other in a scene?
It would seem that to derive the color, Eevee has to get the results of a preceding shader- but the result of that preceding shader requires the light reflected from other objects to be assessed, and if those objects have the same material applied, the light they are reflecting is the output of another 'RGB from Shader', which depends on the reflected light from the first object. Seems infinitely recursive.
+1 for @Justo just ignoring the above and keeping posting helpful stuff ^^
Edit: "crash" means bug.. That means it's not the fault of your script. I loop objects in collections the same way but not in fast succession and it didn't crashed once (2.80)
These are 101 basics guys. Blender shouldn't handhold users to select things they can't see, but instead open the gates to let users decide what selection style they want to choose. Likewise, growing/shrinking along loops and rings is an essential to modeling all other DCC poly-modeling-focused apps own. Please give those tickets a vote!
Quick note on this: running from command line is only needed under Linux. In Windows you can just toggle the system console from Blender itself
This thing that @f1r3w4rr10r suggested with opening a command prompt and starting Blender from that, on Windows, is the only way to catch the error message when you're dealing with fatal crashes from your scripts (when Blender closes to desktop with no warning), since the terminal stays open for you to read the error output. You do this in these cases because the toggable system console will close before you can read it lol
@Justo so I tried here, hiding a collection by script doesn't hide its objects. But then I noticed pressing 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 0, while holding Shift will toggle the visibility of the collection and its objects, so maybe a script isn't needed? You'd put all cutter objects in the same collection and press Shift + number-that-represents-that-collection.
Thanks man. It works fine with Blender factory default keymaps, but not with "industry compatible" keymaps or custom ones. I needed to revert all, but no problem. I can use now the viewport navigation using the "alt" key with the digital pen without issues, but it brokes selection loops.
Rotate - Alt-LMB
It's not written in Blender manual but:
Pan - Shift+Alt-LMB Zoom - Ctrl+Alt-LMB
"Pan shortcut" is Zoom in Modo and viceversa, but it doesn't matter. I need to re-remap some shortcuts and save a file.
@Justo so I tried here, hiding a collection by script doesn't hide its objects. But then I noticed pressing 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 0, while holding Shift will toggle the visibility of the collection and its objects, so maybe a script isn't needed? You'd put all cutter objects in the same collection and press Shift + number-that-represents-that-collection.
This is the only thing in the Blender default keybinds I have changed so far. It annoyed me to no end, that when I am in object mode and think I am in edit mode, I press 1, 2 or 3 to change selection modes, but instead hide everything except collection 1, 2 or 3. Now those do nothing anymore in object mode.
Customizing Blender i have run into this problem. Is something normal? or i'm missing something.
In edit mode > polygon mode, using subdivide it generates what you see on the capture. With "perfect circle" faces and other shapes i obtain bad results. Can we apply the subdivision algorithm from the subdivision modifier via script?
The subdivide operation is one of the most basic operations we need in subdivision modelling, but it doesn't work well as you can see here:
This method of subdivision produces too many unneeded artifacts. Is the equivalent of modo's "smooth" method of subdivision (an option not very used). But there should be an option for a Catmull-Clark method while editing. Is this the result of removing open subdiv from blender?
Applying a smooth in the affected part doesn't help at all, it erases the curvature and flattens all.
With other subdiv primitives or cylindrical forms we get the "pumpkin effect". Not the desired result as shown in the side. If we could apply the modifier to a part of the mesh, it would be fantastic. This is forcing me to split parts as other objects. This is insane.
@Blaizer If I recall you said you were working around a cintiq right? It should have some touch strip no? Or is it one of the newer models with no hotkeys & a remote?
Both of my graphics tablets have touch strips (cintiq 20wsx and a huion kamvas pro 2019), which essentially emulates a mouse wheel. You could try that or if your cintiqs are missing hotkeys and a touch strip, grab or setup the wacom remote dial thing, whatever they call it now to do the same thing.
Alternatively, you can look at the 3rd party options out there which include everything from a usb dial to an xp-pen hotkey remote, even a nintendo switch controller set up joy2key will work. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaRwmXopINA
William Reynish, who is active in that thread is managing the Industry Standard Keymap. So he will mostly likely respond if you find something that needs work with the keymap.
@Dataday Yes, i work with a new Cintiq, just the screen. I activated the "Emulate 3 Button Mouse" in the preferences and worked fine as RN suggested, but it brokes the loop selections.
I've been lurking over those forums but i never registered. I will jump in sooner or later with some feedback.
Fighting a bit with mirroring. How do I mirror an instanced mesh? Naturally I would go with the mirror modifier but it seems not possible to just mirror it does always double the mesh and works like the symmetry modifier from max
Also the mirror command under transform seems to only mirror the global position or the local scale. Say you have a left arm and want a right arm but both should use the same mesh data (aka instances) - how is the current workflow of doing it so I get two separate objects (in contrary to the mirror modifier)
I might be misunderstanding what you mean, but Alt+D does a Linked Duplicate which will create a new object but share the mesh data. You should be able to mirror the duplicate with the mirror commands. Then when you edit one mesh, they both receive the changes.
I might be misunderstanding what you mean, but Alt+D does a Linked Duplicate which will create a new object but share the mesh data. You should be able to mirror the duplicate with the mirror commands. Then when you edit one mesh, they both receive the changes.
I might be totally stupid here but I'm not able to. I create an object, rotate it in an arbitrary way, just to be off the world axis alignment, make a linked duplicate, set cursor to (0,0,0), use transform->mirror, around cursor, global space and I get the instance mirrored in position but not in topology
@rollin I just had a look at it myself and it seems to be an interesting problem, which I never noticed myself so far. It seems that when you mirror and object, which has no rotation applied, you can mirror the linked mesh just fine. (Mirroring the object is just setting one of the scale axes to -1) However when the object you want to mirror has rotation applied, it does not do it. That's curious.
I could imagine that's because there is no easy and reliable way to figure out on which axes to mirror, but it could also just be a bug.
A workaround would be, to just mirror the object as you already did (or move it to where you want to have it) and then just setting the desired axis' scale to -1.
A workaround would be, to just mirror the object as you already did (or move it to where you want to have it) and then just setting the desired axis' scale to -1.
Fastest work around I found yet was to parent the duplicate to an (empty) objects which acts as mirror and then negative-scale this parent. Then unparent by keeping transform ("Clear and Keep Transform"). This sets the parent matrix of the duplicate and applies negative scale as needed to the duplicate. Still this: a) sucks speed wise even though it should be easy to script it into a macro and b) is stupid if I don't want to have negative scale which easily results in inverted faces when exported to e.g. a game engine. So on export the objects need to be made unique and scale applied (or at least made non-negative). Again something we can script but dude..
Is anyone aware of an ticket regarding the mirror modifier - extending it to support simply flipping the mesh?
Fellow artists, BCON2019 was awesome! I had the opportunity to meet all the devs, including Mike Erwin, who's currently working on the interchangeable part of Blender, for UE4 / Unity. Over my talk presented 2 weeks ago, I also mentioned some of my favorite addons this year, from @RN , @kio and Mark Kingsnorth. (I was a little nervous as you can see, never had such a big audience)
But in overall, it was possible to see all the hard work and effort that was put into organizing such event. The staff received a deserved round of applause, including Francesco Siddi! Already hyped for next year! Let's hope to get more polycounters abroad to it as well.
P.S: Expect to see a new boolean system integration, planned for next months, with co-planar intersections!
@LuisCherubini omg man, that's awesome!! Congratulations on being a part of BCon, and thank you for the beautiful shout-out segment (watching it right now). Really cool.
I also recognize that guy on the bottom right, that's Dalai Felinto, a Blender dev and fellow countryman.
Anyone know why my UV unwrapping operations seem to result in the UV faces being separated, even when the faces are connected in the geometry and there aren't associated seams?
P.S: Expect to see a new boolean system integration, planned for next months, with co-planar intersections!
That's good to hear. With "co-planar intersections", do you mean when objects are perfectly overlapping certain sides? Because if so, that's my most anticipated 'fix' (if that's the proper word) to Blender's way of doing things atm. For the rest, I feel pretty comfortable with using HOps&Boxcutter.
EDIT: Also, does anyone know if Blender has anything as fast and stable as Marmoset's feature that allows you to place lights based on the HDRI image? Something that would update in real-time too, like in the GIF, to play with different light settings quickly.
Co-planar intersections!? sounds really good for me, i work a lot with booleans and that's a huge problem!
Blender 2.79 had this useful extrusion, "destructive extrusions" like Sketchup: https://gumroad.com/l/cQjUX If you still use 2.79 like me, give it a try.
But with 2.8 it doesn't works. Anyways, they are planning to add its functionalities in version 2.82. check it out, it's really useful https://developer.blender.org/D5336
Replies
What I was referring to is the expectation of finding exact equivalents tools/UX/workflow from one app to the next - that's just not the way these things work. Of course some evangelist fanboys will tell you that "you can do everything you need in this or that program" but you know very well that's never the case, so imho it is indeed pointless to go in hoping to exactly replicate a workflow from a different app. What you'll find will be sometimes worse, sometimes better - basically different.
And again the remarks on mouse vs stylus input are a irrelevant since this is just a matter of mapping what you want to what you want.
Lastly on performance : indeed it is far from great in some circumstances. Some aspects are getting way better (the custom 2.8 sculpt branch is mindblowing for raw sculpting), and some are still behind the times (editing geo of dense subdiv models not relying on marked bevels can be less than smooth). That's precisely where people like you can make the software better, by precisely documenting the issues and reporting them. Otherwise what's the point ?
def wire_toggle(self, context): if context.space_data.overlay.show_wireframes: context.space_data.overlay.show_wireframes = False else: context.space_data.overlay.show_wireframes = True def execute(self, context): self.wire_toggle(context) return{'FINISHED'}Time for some random bevelled geometry cuts !
If you really were doing things like that in Max, you would not be saying such things. Lies, that's all.
It seems you don't use/know modo, that's sure at 10000%. Heh, "regular sub-d modeling and some sculpting brushes". You make me smile.
About the edit mode you say me: "but that's how it works". Sorry, but is not valid for me because i'm not a conformist. If i can't adapt the software to me, i say: "bye bye, there are 100 times better options". Blender may be free, but it doen't reach the level of productivity and efficiency i'm customed with.
And I'm not dismissing anything. If i can't do a fucking bevel while pinching, inflating, carving, etc. then, Blender doesn't serve me for modelling, hard surfaces or organic, whatever. It's as simple as that. You don't need to complicate things unnecessarily.
I remapped the keys to a Maya style, i modified the modelling tools with a bunch of add-ons and keymaps, and i tried several combinations more, in order to have a better workflow. But i didn't end with something comfortable, without broking other aspects of the program i really liked. I invested too much time for nothing.
Furthermore, for my wacom digital pen i use a keymap i won't change for Blender, not for anything. I did hundreds of changes in modo, and i didn't need to touch my wacom properties/key maps.
You were quite a max evangelist for some time, so I'm wondering from your perspective what made you decide to make the switch/learn to Blender?
You only see trees in the forest my friend. This love of yours with Blender have you really blind. That's the bad thing of forums, some people like you take all said words with ill will, animosity, and later.. they reply in a toxic and offensive way. You shouldn't be bothered if i say that i model in a easiest and fastest way in modo, you shouldn't debate/discuss me anything personal. First of all, for respect, something you lack heavily. So, passing on.
Thanks for the concern @RN, but switching modes didn't help me at all using my Cintiq. And that's the main problem, Blender 2.8 is designed to be used with a mouse and its middle button/wheel. Any important change in the keymap will mess the other keymaps like a nuclear bomb.
I just want to use the pencil brushes to move, and edit like inflating or pinching, not the gizmos. I also wanted to be able to press a keymap/shortcut and do a simple bevel in sculptmode, like i do in Modo, but it's impossible, because we can't select the different elements such as polygons or edges.
pior said: But Pior said that, and later, other users said the contrary.
It should not be a problem, because the workflow is very very simple, and Blender has all the tools there. But it seems like Blender 2.8 can't do what i'm doing since year 2006. The actual Blender is for me like "to paint an illustration without tablet, just a mouse", it's like going back to year 2000. I tried it hard with Blender, very hard, but i'm doing things in a much better way, much faster and with 1000% more perfomance in Modo (and Modo is not precisely the best user friendly app in the world).
@RN haven't had time to test you advice yet but sounds nice and I'll come back to it. thx!
@RN That's it! I use HOps so all cutters are actually automatically sent already to a collection, so I should be able to only hide that. Thanks for the idea. Curiously enough, I notice that Blender allows the same object to be present multiple times inside the Outliner - inside a collection for example, and outside too. This causes problems with hiding objects, because if they are also present outside the collection, they will not be turned invisible. I know 2.81 did some changes to how Collections and Outliner works - was this addressed, or can objects still be present multiple times in Blender's newest version?
I had to say much more about the workflow i use, "polysculpting modelling" (he was upset with the name aswell), but with things like this.. he can go and figure it by himself.
Pues sí, a mi me afectó la manara en la que me respondió. A eso se le llama pura soberbia.
@rollin Sorry man. I don't pretend to derail the thread. But i can't stand when someone starts doing nonsense personal attacks, and moreover, when others opinions are not of their liking. That's fanatism. Anyways, i won't reply anymore about the workflow Blender is unable to use.
Okay then, the script is working now, iterating through all objects in a scene.
for obj in bpy.context.scene.objects: if obj.type == 'MESH' and obj.display_type == 'WIRE': obj.hide_viewport = TrueIf anyone knows how to iterate through objects inside a collection though, I'd super appreciate it if they could drop the knowledge.
for obj in bpy.data.collections["Cutters"].all_objects: if obj.type == 'MESH' and obj.display_type == 'WIRE': obj.hide_viewport = FalseProblem solvedHave a nice day.
It would seem that to derive the color, Eevee has to get the results of a preceding shader- but the result of that preceding shader requires the light reflected from other objects to be assessed, and if those objects have the same material applied, the light they are reflecting is the output of another 'RGB from Shader', which depends on the reflected light from the first object. Seems infinitely recursive.
---
Hey uhh, so about the script I was using to hide booleans...If I iterate through the collection with:
It crashes often. Specially if I execute the script in quick succession. However if I iterate through all the objects in the scene, like with:
This problem doesnt occur. Does anyone know why this may be happening?
Edit: "crash" means bug.. That means it's not the fault of your script. I loop objects in collections the same way but not in fast succession and it didn't crashed once (2.80)
Decouple XRay from Limit Selection to Visible (there is also an extensive feedback thread with reports from users who've worked with Blender for a lot longer than I):
https://blender.community/c/rightclickselect/G6bbbc/
Grow/Shrink along Loop & Ring:
https://blender.community/c/rightclickselect/zXcbbc/
These are 101 basics guys. Blender shouldn't handhold users to select things they can't see, but instead open the gates to let users decide what selection style they want to choose. Likewise, growing/shrinking along loops and rings is an essential to modeling all other DCC poly-modeling-focused apps own. Please give those tickets a vote!
Rotate - Alt-LMB
It's not written in Blender manual but:
Pan - Shift+Alt-LMB
Zoom - Ctrl+Alt-LMB
"Pan shortcut" is Zoom in Modo and viceversa, but it doesn't matter. I need to re-remap some shortcuts and save a file.
In edit mode > polygon mode, using subdivide it generates what you see on the capture. With "perfect circle" faces and other shapes i obtain bad results. Can we apply the subdivision algorithm from the subdivision modifier via script?
The subdivide operation is one of the most basic operations we need in subdivision modelling, but it doesn't work well as you can see here:
This method of subdivision produces too many unneeded artifacts. Is the equivalent of modo's "smooth" method of subdivision (an option not very used). But there should be an option for a Catmull-Clark method while editing. Is this the result of removing open subdiv from blender?
Applying a smooth in the affected part doesn't help at all, it erases the curvature and flattens all.
With other subdiv primitives or cylindrical forms we get the "pumpkin effect". Not the desired result as shown in the side. If we could apply the modifier to a part of the mesh, it would be fantastic. This is forcing me to split parts as other objects. This is insane.
Both of my graphics tablets have touch strips (cintiq 20wsx and a huion kamvas pro 2019), which essentially emulates a mouse wheel. You could try that or if your cintiqs are missing hotkeys and a touch strip, grab or setup the wacom remote dial thing, whatever they call it now to do the same thing.
Alternatively, you can look at the 3rd party options out there which include everything from a usb dial to an xp-pen hotkey remote, even a nintendo switch controller set up joy2key will work.
You can always jump on the BlenderArtists forum as well and hit up this thread with your feedback: https://blenderartists.org/t/industry-compatible-keymap/1155183/53
William Reynish, who is active in that thread is managing the Industry Standard Keymap. So he will mostly likely respond if you find something that needs work with the keymap.
I've been lurking over those forums but i never registered. I will jump in sooner or later with some feedback.
Also the mirror command under transform seems to only mirror the global position or the local scale. Say you have a left arm and want a right arm but both should use the same mesh data (aka instances) - how is the current workflow of doing it so I get two separate objects (in contrary to the mirror modifier)
I create an object, rotate it in an arbitrary way, just to be off the world axis alignment, make a linked duplicate, set cursor to (0,0,0), use transform->mirror, around cursor, global space and I get the instance mirrored in position but not in topology
Still this:
a) sucks speed wise even though it should be easy to script it into a macro
and b) is stupid if I don't want to have negative scale which easily results in inverted faces when exported to e.g. a game engine. So on export the objects need to be made unique and scale applied (or at least made non-negative). Again something we can script but dude..
Is anyone aware of an ticket regarding the mirror modifier - extending it to support simply flipping the mesh?
But in overall, it was possible to see all the hard work and effort that was put into organizing such event. The staff received a deserved round of applause, including Francesco Siddi! Already hyped for next year! Let's hope to get more polycounters abroad to it as well.
P.S: Expect to see a new boolean system integration, planned for next months, with co-planar intersections!
EDIT: Also, does anyone know if Blender has anything as fast and stable as Marmoset's feature that allows you to place lights based on the HDRI image? Something that would update in real-time too, like in the GIF, to play with different light settings quickly.
Blender 2.79 had this useful extrusion, "destructive extrusions" like Sketchup: https://gumroad.com/l/cQjUX If you still use 2.79 like me, give it a try.
But with 2.8 it doesn't works. Anyways, they are planning to add its functionalities in version 2.82. check it out, it's really useful https://developer.blender.org/D5336