Yes, I understand that. I was trying to see if it would be perhaps easier to place a sphere with the desired edge count where you need it, scale it to get the curvature you want, delete one half and merge.
Otherwise you could make the cylinder higher and bevel down the top - probably this is the easiest way I can think of. You can even control the curvature this way.
@wirrexx Yep, if you move a primitive you will lose control of segments etc, but at least there is an addon for that ''wondermesh'', don't remember if is paid or not. You can also make a custom cylinder with the screw modifier and import it everytime you need.
@RN Thanks. It works: Any chance the white border lines between the cells can be removed? It would break the seamless look of the textures when randomised. I included a second box to show the texture when mapped normally. Also, how do I exposed the nodes ''CELLS'' and ''RANDOM'' as parameters u can tweak in a new node group? I can't plug them to the Group node input as they are using the Vaule node which has no input socket. Also someone from Blenderartists method: link
Late answer but the reason this happens is super interesting. You can also see it in Prime8's post. It's not a Blender thing, it's a general GPU thing, and depending on your offline renderer it could be gone entirely. For starters, look closely and you'll find rather than white it's made of 2x2 grey blocks, although the exact color will depend on your texture, and that's because what you're seeing is your texture's roughest mip level (or a close one).
What's happening is to select a mip level, your GPU rasterizes pixels in 2x2 blocks and looks at the UV differences between each pixel to get the partial derivatives (that'd be the ddx and ddy functions in HLSL). Then the mip level for the four pixels in that block is chosen based on those derivatives. This system assumes that UV coordinates are a continuous function across a given polygon, so if your shader introduces a discontinuity, then the GPU is going to assume your UV continuously went through the whole distance instead and select a very coarse mipmap.
There's no way to tell your GPU there's going to be a discontinuity, so you have to find workarounds. As you found out, just using a filtering mode where there's no mips (nearest neighbors for you) will solve the problem. You can also bake the shuffled version in texture space and use that, or even implement your own filtering.
@Chev thanks for the explanation. I didn't pay much attention to it tbh, because it's not showing in Cycles and probably some kind of filtering in the viewport that cannot be changed anyway. When using actual textures that don't have rainbow colors, it's barely visible.
Hey, maybe this was already answered but I just recently switched to 2.81. I found that they have changed something with the 1,2,3 keys for vert,edge,face selection. Now when you use the industry standard keymap and you have e.g. an armature selected and you hit 3 (pose mode) blender tries to switch to edit mode + face selection.
Before I start hacking my key config. Is there something obvious I'm missing?
Anyone here familiar with bmesh.ops.find_doubles? I'm unable to find detailed information on the net. Either the "keep_verts" parameter doesn't work as described or I don't understand it correctly.
Hi Common problem. I cant render a video with audio. Using 2.83. Same problem in 2.82. Usually it is because audio is not included in the output preferences, ffmpeg isnt engaged or sequencer is checked under post processing. I know this works because I had it working before. Its just a test animation with a simple mp3 audio file that plays fine in the editor. Here is the setup. Reimporting the video shows no sound included, like you can see on channel 4. Any help appreciated.
I've started using blender for production now on some smaller assets and i'm loving it - with boxcutter+hardOps, modelling is fun again, or should i say even more fun! I'm still figuring out the pipeline however, the only gripe i have is the uv editor. I feel like i've got to be doing something wrong because i shouldn't be getting as frustrated as I am doing (even resorting to using max to unwrap).
Even though you have an object selected, you still have to select all the faces of that object to see the full uv in the editor, why? Can you not just view the entire uv without having to have all the faces selected? I've got to be doing something wrong, right? There seems to be a huge difference between object mode and edit mode whereas in max it's completely unnoticeable.
I've got a number of uv editor plugins for blender to help ease the transition, but I guess i'm just going to have to get used to it as it's just not the same.
TLDR: Blender is awesome and i love it for modelling, however uv'ing is a pain - i've got to be doing something wrong, any help?
@MrNinjutsu In the UV editor, have a look at the left most button of the top menu. It should say "UV Sync Selection". If you activate that toggle, it will show you all elements in the UV editor and sync the selection between the 3D editor and UV editor, instead of filtering what you see in the UV editor by the selection of the 3D editor.
@MrNinjutsu In the UV editor, have a look at the left most button of the top menu. It should say "UV Sync Selection". If you activate that toggle, it will show you all elements in the UV editor and sync the selection between the 3D editor and UV editor, instead of filtering what you see in the UV editor by the selection of the 3D editor.
Right okay, I'll have to check that out once I'm back on the pc. I did check that but whilst editing it threw an error telling me that I had to have it unchecked. Perhaps I was using a UV plugin with it.
@MrNinjutsu. There is a button in the top left of the Blender uvlayouut that lets you sync the elements. The one on the left allows you to edit elements independently, but the model has to be selected. In the top left corner of the interface there is a button for syncing selected elements. The mesh doesn't have to be selected but selecting one element selects connected elements. With the sync button off you can only view elements selected in the 3D view to the right of the layout. Which is useful for sorting through and isolating , for example, linked elements.
So really, it's more of a feature than an oversight. Is that what you were writing about?
@MrNinjutsu Like you, I've only been using Blender to model in casually and am a Max user. I'm currently doing my first big(in Blender) AAA gun asset(100K) and have avoided Blender's unwrap tools like the plague..........until now. The UV sync thing was completely alien to my brain and I just couldn't see the logic of it. I've been unwrapping in Max so long now(since before it even had an unwrap modifier) and have my workflow to a fine art at this stage, that I just couldn't see myself ever unwrapping in Blender.
I decided to bite the bullet this time though and vowed to try my best to get past the UV sync thing as unwrapping directly in Blender would just save the hassle of moving back and forth to Max on an asset this complex, and wow am I glad I did.
I dived right in and pretty much developed a lightning fast workflow straight away. I will be using Blender to unwrap from now on 100%.
Disclaimer: I use 3 addons that are essential, imo. Textools, UV Highlighter, and the PHENOMENAL UV Packmaster Pro - I bought this the very same night I started unwrapping and it instantly paid for itself. It is that good(also available for Max now)
So my workflow is very simple and fast and will unwrap 100% of meshes with very little effort. In Max I very rarely use seams as it's just so clunky. I always unwrap face selections. I pretty much follow the same approach in Blender. However, Blender's selection tools are better than Max's and seams are easy to set. I use seams for cylindrical/tubular pieces. As for the UV sync thing, I've actually learned to embrace it rather than fight it and it actually works to my advantage in the workflow I use. I only turn on sync when I want to edit multiple islands or when I'm packing. Here's the workflow in a nutshell:
1 - select faces> U unwrap(or smart unwrap for chunks of planar surfaces that will be multiple islands) Blender unwrap algorithm is decent and I turn on the stretching visualiser during this stage until all chunks are unwrapped.
2 - H to hide unwrapped face selection. This is great because UV sync is off and everything is uncluttered and you can simply concentrate on breaking off shells. Islands/geo is instantly hidden as it's unwrapped so this is so fast and efficient.
3 - rinse and repeat until all chunks are unwrapped - cylinders/tubes are dealt with below.
4 - it's that simple.
5 - roughly normalise and pack all islands.
6 - run through all islands and run rectify(textools), align to edge, and straighten border edges where needed. This can obviously done between steps 1 and 2, but I find it quicker to do everything in global stages. I rarely(if ever) have to mess about with stitching or welding or most of the other tools. This workflow requires the minimum amount of tools.
7 - run UV Packmaster. This is so good that it will save hours of fiddly manual packing that is usually inevitable in Max.
Cylinders/tubes/ropes/wires/etc:
For these I will usually run around and mark all the loop seams in advance and then it's very fast to use the select linked>seams tool(L key) and then use the rectify and edge peel tools from Textools, and even the native Unwrap tool will result in perfectly laid out cylindrical islands. Also, as I'm sure you know, Max's unfold strip from loop has been broken for years and wastes a lot of time on the hacks required to unwrap connected geo this way and having to manually normalise these kinds of islands due to one axis or the other being stretched(not to mention it always unwraps the island as a GIANT island) This isn't the case at all in Blender and unfold strip from loop equivalent works as expected. This is a huge bonus for me.
So, all in all, I'm finding Blender to be very fast for unwrapping anything(I thought I was fast in Max) and note that it took me years to develop my Max workflow. In Blender, I pretty much developed it in a single sitting of less than 2 hours. I had went from zero practical unwrapping experience to the complex Scope of the weapon unwrapped and packed and ready to bake(this 2 hours also included purchasing UV Packmaster and installing/reading the docs)
This all might sound a bit hyperbolic, but believe me, I was stunned at how efficient this process is. The time alone saved adding and collapsing and rearranging the Max UV window of the unwrap modifier is reason enough to switch. Haha!
Anyway, as a fellow Max veteran I would highly advise giving it a go. The UV sync thing put me off for the almost a year that I've been messing about in Blender, but it's really not a big deal and actually benefits the workflow I've developed for myself. Happy unwrapping.
This all might sound a bit hyperbolic, but believe me, I was stunned at how efficient this process is.
Yeah. I switched to Blender from MAx mostly BECAUSE of blender UV. Always shrugged when people say UV is so so in Blender. Through years I tried Headus and Rizom lab and yeah, they have a few features extra but for me it always have been enough In Blender even without textools . Its fluent key based approach just always feel nice.
Love its V(stitch) with Tab switching in between edge and vertex mode and I button scrolling stitching variants.
Like it's PIn/unpin button and "live" mode allowing to bend organic subject islands to fit tighter . Imo Max just copied this from Blender years after.
Love how I could slide verex or edge with double G and then with ALT pressed could slide those outside of the object with UV following. Last time I tried it in MAx I got something weird.
The subdivision surface modifier is still very bad in Blender 2.82, it still has "ultra low perfomance". It's impossible to work with 1-2 iterations whereas with modo i can handle without effort 4 iterations or more. Also, about the poor perfomance, It was said they were working on it for this release, but nothing.
@Blaizer OpenSubDiv is not a toggle. In 2.8 the entire Subdivision Surface modifier has been ported over to use it. That is also the reason of the loss in performance. They still have to add some optimizations.
@f1r3w4rr10r You mean they "integrated" OpenSubdiv in the modifier and they lost all the perfomance with the new port/modifier?
"The threading scheduler is already in master (upcoming 2.82), so the daily builds should already show a better performance. So all the known issues on that are fixed. If the problem persist with a recent build builder.blender.org please report a new issue."
https://developer.blender.org/T70826
It seems they "worked" but for nothing. People are still having the same issues as in 2.8.
In Blender 2.76-2.79 we had a tick in the modifier, "Use Open Subdiv". When togglen on, It boosted the perfomance a lot, and it was a good feature on its days.
Let's cross fingers, i wish they fix the huge perfomance loss for the next version. I want to be able to edit like in modo, or Max at least.
For one I would not really model with that high amount of subdivisions, but to each their own workflow.
You could also check the precision (at least I think it is named like that) slider in the modifier. That promises a performance boost and was still there in 2.81. I have not checked 2.82 yet.
Thanks man, i visited the reference after you replied me, and later, the developer section aswell. this issue was something they were working in, but nothing. version 2.82 were supposed have this issue fixed.
In known limitations: "GPU side OpenSubdiv is disabled, since it needs to be re-integrated into a new viewport rendering pipeline"
We need to wait for a proper implementation.
Blender 2.82 has profile presets now (Ctrl+B), so we can do stairs and other things in just one click. A feature i use a lot in modo, very handy. We can blockout levels very fast.
The bad, this feature seems to be unfinished. It's too bad there isn't a way to save and restore custom profiles. They didn't think that?
Thanks guys, I really appreciate the time to help, because it has helped me. The UV sync made it much easier for me navigate the UV of the entire object. I do think it should just be standard to see the whole UV of the object by default and if i want to isolate parts of the uv (which is a cool feature!) I think there should be a toggle to isolate selection rather than the other way around, but hey, that's my preference and how i feel i UV most effectively. The whole process felt much less frustrating for me and I'm not so worried about uv'ing any more. Thanks blender bro's!
@MrNinjutsu you should even be able to set this toggle to the state you want by default. Just add it to your startup scene. Although I don't know if this toggle is associated to single objects or if it is global. If the latter is the case, then setting it in your startup scene should work.
Quick question about the new Blender denoiser (d-noise). I had the d-noise addon installed previously before it was integrated into Blender 2.83, worked really great.
I tried to re-install the addon from the original site ( https://remington.pro/software/blender/d-noise/ ), but now I can't install the OptiX binaries anymore (Nothing happens when I click the button for it in the preferences).
What do I do so I can use the d-noiser in Blender again?
In the Preferences it says in the OptiX section of the Cycles renderer that 'No compatible GPUs found for path tracing'. There is a GTX 1070ti installed in my system.
Which is peculiar, because I have rendered entire animations already using the d-noise addon, which worked absolutely flawlessly. It probably rendered everything using the CPU? Is that not possible anymore with the d-noise integration?
@wilson66 I am not familiar with the d-noise add-on, so I don't know what it used exactly. But any option naming OptiX sound like it would use the OptiX cycles rendering device. And for OptiX you need a card with Ray tracing cores, so any of the RTX series.
If you use the denoiser compositing node on the other hand, that is from Intel and runs on the CPU. It is even mentioned in the article you linked:
"Among the most popular AI / ML denoisers are Intel's OIDN (Open Image DeNoise) and NVIDIA's OptiX denoiser. For final rendering, both OIDN and OptiX have already been implemented in Blender[...]"
hey guys, what's your preferred method of making pipes? All shapes, all sizes. Some Brian Sum stuff for example:
I think the fastest easiest method is via making curves converted from geo, then using a separate curve to define the shape and segments, like this method shows. Do you prefer any other method? Any Spin tool fans out there that would prefer working with that to make something like the pic above?
@Justo , I use an old script by Seneca, from modo 302, Extrude alogn path/curve. It can use edges loops from a mesh so i don't need to "convert edges to spline". It's identical of what is shown in that video, and it's very good for pipes, molds, etc.
Actual methods can use a bezier spline and it's non destructive, fully procedural. Max, Modo, 3DCoat and much more apps have that feature, including a twist option aswell. You can build complex meshes in no time. Blender has it aswell.
@MACHIN3 : well that looks like yet another excellent update ! Having a way to convert dropped-in details into mesh cuts like that will sure be extremely handy. And props for not only creating such a tool but also providing an excellent, ready-to-use trim sheet too. Exciting stuff.
I suppose you also have some way to one-click unwrap loops and grid selection into clean strips and grid ? So as to be able to work without even adding cuts when possible.
[edit] well actually it looks like you already have exactly that as shown at the very beginning of the video Would it also work on selections of just a few faces rather than full loops ? To insert a detail from the sheet over a 2x2 set of quads for instance.
@Blaizer : IMHO you'd have much better chances of seeing these problems addressed by precisely documenting them and reporting them to the actual devs. People here are just users just like you, so no one will be able to tell you in detail why this or that feature is broken or underperforming (and much less be able to fix it for you).
@Justo : the most non-destructive *and* most intuitive way to make pipes is the Skin modifier approach. Build the spine of the desired pipe using edges > apply the Skin modifier > go back to edit mode > select all verts > ctrl A to set the desired radius. And then a Subdivision modifier on top to get a round section.
(The fact that there is no radius override option in the modifier itself is really dumb. Also the fact that there is no way to directly access the radius value of each vert is really inconsistent with the other tools relying on Vertex Groups or edge properties. But hey at least it works !)
In theory one could probably use splines of course but imho they are too awkward too manipulate and will just get in your way, compared to the easy of use of the Skin approach. But to each their own of course.
@Pior you may have reason, but i can not open another thread with the reported issue, i don't want to be a bother. Several people are saying the same everywhere, or reported it on the developer.blender forums. https://developer.blender.org/T70826 If you read the thread, you'll see the issue is "closed", and it's like they are fed up of people complaining about it. They merged several threads into one: https://developer.blender.org/T58191
I know perfectly polycounters are users like me, but i just pretend to "inform" here of an issue that should have been solved in Blender 2.82 as they stated. When i noticed this issue with Blender 2.80 i asked here aswell, and i was told it would be fixed in 2.82 (it was a very well known issue). Almost a year have passed since that.
If it were a bug, i would try to replicate it and document it, but that's not the case. It's a huge perfomance issue we didn't have in Blender 2.76, and thats all. All i can do is to wait for future releases.
A feature I would love to have would be to create trims from just selecting edges.
Example; Standard box. User selects all edges and generates trims from edges. Trims are unwrapped and ready to go.
I do a lot of this work in 3ds max using a script to basically take my selected edges, duclicate object, extrude edges with 0 height and 10 cm width, turn selected edges to a faces selection, invert selection and delete those faces. This works but I still have to manually unwrap the generated edge trims. However it is a really awesome way to create trims for corners on buildings, assets and so on. Love this way of constructing assets. If this workflow could somehow be supported in decalmachine that would be really awesome
I suppose you also have some way to one-click unwrap loops and grid selection into clean strips and grid ? So as to be able to work without even adding cuts when possible.
[edit] well actually it looks like you already have exactly that as shown at the very beginning of the video Would it also work on selections of just a few faces rather than full loops ? To insert a detail from the sheet over a 2x2 set of quads for instance.
Yes you can quad unwrap things easily, cyclic or non-cyclic, doesn't matter. I haven't shown PolyUnwrap yet, but it's like quad unwrap, except it supports tris and n-gons among the selection and still 'quad unwraps' them, as long as they follow a quad topology basically.
A feature I would love to have would be to create trims from just selecting edges.
Example; Standard box. User selects all edges and generates trims from edges. Trims are unwrapped and ready to go.
I do a lot of this work in 3ds max using a script to basically take my selected edges, duclicate object, extrude edges with 0 height and 10 cm width, turn selected edges to a faces selection, invert selection and delete those faces. This works but I still have to manually unwrap the generated edge trims. However it is a really awesome way to create trims for corners on buildings, assets and so on. Love this way of constructing assets. If this workflow could somehow be supported in decalmachine that would be really awesome
@Blaizer The video you linked shows the same method from my video. The old script you talk about, from modo 302, is it usable for Blender? Obviously I'm not very interesting in doing this in other apps for now. If it's compatible with Blender, I'd love to try it if you could share.
@YaP That's probably the fastest one so far, nice! I can see it being cumbersome for certain pipe shapes that have a lot more zigzagging going on, but for simpler setups this is probably the best solution, thanks for sharing
@pior The skin method is great, and probably the best alternative when YaP's solution doesn't cut it. Thanks pior!
@Justo I dearly, dearly miss my Max splines and Blender's curves are no comparison. For pipes and wires I exclusively build them with edges and verts and apply a sub-div mod(or just bevel verts if it won't be edited after) I use either Quickpipe addon or Hops equivalent(can also quickly adjust diameter at any time with Hops)
I find working with verts/edges much easier and faster than messing about with curves. Say, for instance, you have 2 pipe/wire sockets that you want a wire going between, I'll just duplicate the 2 cylinder caps>P separate selection>collapse them to a single vert each>select the verts and hit F to connect them>then just add verts in the middle of the new edge and edit the positions>add a subdiv and continue editing. This keeps everything easy to manage and edit and pipe/wire ends will always be in the exact position.
Also, Fluent has a great pipes/wires/bundles tool with options for twisting and adding sleeves and other effects.
@musashidan That Quick Pipes addon is fantastic! Am I correct in saying that there is no way you can resize the curve points, as you would using the Skin modifier workflow? It's not a big deal though - the speed from using this is well worth it, I think.
For making pipes I wrote a script that automatically converts a selected edge to curve and calls HOPS curve to pipe so I can immediately adjust pipe diameter. works great!
Replies
Otherwise you could make the cylinder higher and bevel down the top - probably this is the easiest way I can think of. You can even control the curvature this way.
In this case I would use the hook modifier and keep the original topo flat for easier editing
What's happening is to select a mip level, your GPU rasterizes pixels in 2x2 blocks and looks at the UV differences between each pixel to get the partial derivatives (that'd be the ddx and ddy functions in HLSL). Then the mip level for the four pixels in that block is chosen based on those derivatives. This system assumes that UV coordinates are a continuous function across a given polygon, so if your shader introduces a discontinuity, then the GPU is going to assume your UV continuously went through the whole distance instead and select a very coarse mipmap.
There's no way to tell your GPU there's going to be a discontinuity, so you have to find workarounds. As you found out, just using a filtering mode where there's no mips (nearest neighbors for you) will solve the problem. You can also bake the shuffled version in texture space and use that, or even implement your own filtering.
I didn't pay much attention to it tbh, because it's not showing in Cycles and probably some kind of filtering in the viewport that cannot be changed anyway.
When using actual textures that don't have rainbow colors, it's barely visible.
I found that they have changed something with the 1,2,3 keys for vert,edge,face selection.
Now when you use the industry standard keymap and you have e.g. an armature selected and you hit 3 (pose mode) blender tries to switch to edit mode + face selection.
Before I start hacking my key config. Is there something obvious I'm missing?
Either the "keep_verts" parameter doesn't work as described or I don't understand it correctly.
https://docs.blender.org/api/current/bmesh.ops.html
If keep_verts is used, vertices outside that set can only be merged with vertices in that set.
When I use it, vertices outside the set are merged with each other.
Common problem. I cant render a video with audio. Using 2.83. Same problem in 2.82. Usually it is because audio is not included in the output preferences, ffmpeg isnt engaged or sequencer is checked under post processing. I know this works because I had it working before. Its just a test animation with a simple mp3 audio file that plays fine in the editor. Here is the setup. Reimporting the video shows no sound included, like you can see on channel 4. Any help appreciated.
Even though you have an object selected, you still have to select all the faces of that object to see the full uv in the editor, why? Can you not just view the entire uv without having to have all the faces selected? I've got to be doing something wrong, right? There seems to be a huge difference between object mode and edit mode whereas in max it's completely unnoticeable.
I've got a number of uv editor plugins for blender to help ease the transition, but I guess i'm just going to have to get used to it as it's just not the same.
TLDR: Blender is awesome and i love it for modelling, however uv'ing is a pain - i've got to be doing something wrong, any help?
Thanks.
There is a button in the top left of the Blender uvlayouut that lets you sync the elements.
The one on the left allows you to edit elements independently, but the model has to be selected. In the top left corner of the interface there is a button for syncing selected elements. The mesh doesn't have to be selected but selecting one element selects connected elements. With the sync button off you can only view elements selected in the 3D view to the right of the layout. Which is useful for sorting through and isolating , for example, linked elements.
So really, it's more of a feature than an oversight. Is that what you were writing about?
Cheers
I decided to bite the bullet this time though and vowed to try my best to get past the UV sync thing as unwrapping directly in Blender would just save the hassle of moving back and forth to Max on an asset this complex, and wow am I glad I did.
I dived right in and pretty much developed a lightning fast workflow straight away. I will be using Blender to unwrap from now on 100%.
Disclaimer: I use 3 addons that are essential, imo. Textools, UV Highlighter, and the PHENOMENAL UV Packmaster Pro - I bought this the very same night I started unwrapping and it instantly paid for itself. It is that good(also available for Max now)
So my workflow is very simple and fast and will unwrap 100% of meshes with very little effort. In Max I very rarely use seams as it's just so clunky. I always unwrap face selections. I pretty much follow the same approach in Blender. However, Blender's selection tools are better than Max's and seams are easy to set. I use seams for cylindrical/tubular pieces. As for the UV sync thing, I've actually learned to embrace it rather than fight it and it actually works to my advantage in the workflow I use. I only turn on sync when I want to edit multiple islands or when I'm packing. Here's the workflow in a nutshell:
1 - select faces> U unwrap(or smart unwrap for chunks of planar surfaces that will be multiple islands) Blender unwrap algorithm is decent and I turn on the stretching visualiser during this stage until all chunks are unwrapped.
2 - H to hide unwrapped face selection. This is great because UV sync is off and everything is uncluttered and you can simply concentrate on breaking off shells. Islands/geo is instantly hidden as it's unwrapped so this is so fast and efficient.
3 - rinse and repeat until all chunks are unwrapped - cylinders/tubes are dealt with below.
4 - it's that simple.
5 - roughly normalise and pack all islands.
6 - run through all islands and run rectify(textools), align to edge, and straighten border edges where needed. This can obviously done between steps 1 and 2, but I find it quicker to do everything in global stages. I rarely(if ever) have to mess about with stitching or welding or most of the other tools. This workflow requires the minimum amount of tools.
7 - run UV Packmaster. This is so good that it will save hours of fiddly manual packing that is usually inevitable in Max.
Cylinders/tubes/ropes/wires/etc:
For these I will usually run around and mark all the loop seams in advance and then it's very fast to use the select linked>seams tool(L key) and then use the rectify and edge peel tools from Textools, and even the native Unwrap tool will result in perfectly laid out cylindrical islands. Also, as I'm sure you know, Max's unfold strip from loop has been broken for years and wastes a lot of time on the hacks required to unwrap connected geo this way and having to manually normalise these kinds of islands due to one axis or the other being stretched(not to mention it always unwraps the island as a GIANT island) This isn't the case at all in Blender and unfold strip from loop equivalent works as expected. This is a huge bonus for me.
So, all in all, I'm finding Blender to be very fast for unwrapping anything(I thought I was fast in Max) and note that it took me years to develop my Max workflow. In Blender, I pretty much developed it in a single sitting of less than 2 hours.
This all might sound a bit hyperbolic, but believe me, I was stunned at how efficient this process is. The time alone saved adding and collapsing and rearranging the Max UV window of the unwrap modifier is reason enough to switch. Haha!
Anyway, as a fellow Max veteran I would highly advise giving it a go. The UV sync thing put me off for the almost a year that I've been messing about in Blender, but it's really not a big deal and actually benefits the workflow I've developed for myself. Happy unwrapping.
And where's Open subdiv?
"The threading scheduler is already in master (upcoming 2.82), so the daily builds should already show a better performance. So all the known issues on that are fixed. If the problem persist with a recent build builder.blender.org please report a new issue."
https://developer.blender.org/T70826
It seems they "worked" but for nothing. People are still having the same issues as in 2.8.
In Blender 2.76-2.79 we had a tick in the modifier, "Use Open Subdiv". When togglen on, It boosted the perfomance a lot, and it was a good feature on its days.
Let's cross fingers, i wish they fix the huge perfomance loss for the next version. I want to be able to edit like in modo, or Max at least.
In known limitations:
"GPU side OpenSubdiv is disabled, since it needs to be re-integrated into a new viewport rendering pipeline"
We need to wait for a proper implementation.
Blender 2.82 has profile presets now (Ctrl+B), so we can do stairs and other things in just one click. A feature i use a lot in modo, very handy. We can blockout levels very fast.
The bad, this feature seems to be unfinished. It's too bad there isn't a way to save and restore custom profiles. They didn't think that?
@kanga
@f1r3w4rr10r
Thanks guys, I really appreciate the time to help, because it has helped me. The UV sync made it much easier for me navigate the UV of the entire object. I do think it should just be standard to see the whole UV of the object by default and if i want to isolate parts of the uv (which is a cool feature!) I think there should be a toggle to isolate selection rather than the other way around, but hey, that's my preference and how i feel i UV most effectively. The whole process felt much less frustrating for me and I'm not so worried about uv'ing any more. Thanks blender bro's!
Now that the addon was integrated into Blender, I uninstalled the addon I had installed manually, started the Blender 2.83 alpha (build from today), but the d-noiser is not there. The drop-down menus ect as shown here: https://www.blendernation.com/2020/02/13/blender-features-update-optix-viewport-denoising-added-to-2-83/ do not exist in my version of Blender 2.83.
I tried to re-install the addon from the original site ( https://remington.pro/software/blender/d-noise/ ), but now I can't install the OptiX binaries anymore (Nothing happens when I click the button for it in the preferences).
What do I do so I can use the d-noiser in Blender again?
In the Preferences it says in the OptiX section of the Cycles renderer that 'No compatible GPUs found for path tracing'. There is a GTX 1070ti installed in my system.
Which is peculiar, because I have rendered entire animations already using the d-noise addon, which worked absolutely flawlessly. It probably rendered everything using the CPU? Is that not possible anymore with the d-noise integration?
I think the fastest easiest method is via making curves converted from geo, then using a separate curve to define the shape and segments, like this method shows.
Do you prefer any other method? Any Spin tool fans out there that would prefer working with that to make something like the pic above?
Actual methods can use a bezier spline and it's non destructive, fully procedural. Max, Modo, 3DCoat and much more apps have that feature, including a twist option aswell. You can build complex meshes in no time. Blender has it aswell.
https://youtu.be/tTvD9_fDQOQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPKkmIYi2tA
I suppose you also have some way to one-click unwrap loops and grid selection into clean strips and grid ? So as to be able to work without even adding cuts when possible.
[edit] well actually it looks like you already have exactly that as shown at the very beginning of the video
@Blaizer : IMHO you'd have much better chances of seeing these problems addressed by precisely documenting them and reporting them to the actual devs. People here are just users just like you, so no one will be able to tell you in detail why this or that feature is broken or underperforming (and much less be able to fix it for you).
@Justo : the most non-destructive *and* most intuitive way to make pipes is the Skin modifier approach. Build the spine of the desired pipe using edges > apply the Skin modifier > go back to edit mode > select all verts > ctrl A to set the desired radius. And then a Subdivision modifier on top to get a round section.
(The fact that there is no radius override option in the modifier itself is really dumb. Also the fact that there is no way to directly access the radius value of each vert is really inconsistent with the other tools relying on Vertex Groups or edge properties. But hey at least it works !)
In theory one could probably use splines of course but imho they are too awkward too manipulate and will just get in your way, compared to the easy of use of the Skin approach. But to each their own of course.
I know perfectly polycounters are users like me, but i just pretend to "inform" here of an issue that should have been solved in Blender 2.82 as they stated. When i noticed this issue with Blender 2.80 i asked here aswell, and i was told it would be fixed in 2.82 (it was a very well known issue). Almost a year have passed since that.
If it were a bug, i would try to replicate it and document it, but that's not the case. It's a huge perfomance issue we didn't have in Blender 2.76, and thats all. All i can do is to wait for future releases.
Can you provide a visual example?
@YaP That's probably the fastest one so far, nice! I can see it being cumbersome for certain pipe shapes that have a lot more zigzagging going on, but for simpler setups this is probably the best solution, thanks for sharing
@pior The skin method is great, and probably the best alternative when YaP's solution doesn't cut it. Thanks pior!
I find working with verts/edges much easier and faster than messing about with curves. Say, for instance, you have 2 pipe/wire sockets that you want a wire going between, I'll just duplicate the 2 cylinder caps>P separate selection>collapse them to a single vert each>select the verts and hit F to connect them>then just add verts in the middle of the new edge and edit the positions>add a subdiv and continue editing. This keeps everything easy to manage and edit and pipe/wire ends will always be in the exact position.
Also, Fluent has a great pipes/wires/bundles tool with options for twisting and adding sleeves and other effects.
That Quick Pipes addon is fantastic! Am I correct in saying that there is no way you can resize the curve points, as you would using the Skin modifier workflow? It's not a big deal though - the speed from using this is well worth it, I think.