2022-07-27 Geometry Nodes sub-module meeting

The meeting will be open for everybody interested in joining the video call (link below).

Meeting time: 15:00 CEST (Your local time: 2022-07-27T13:00:00Z).



  • Aras Pranckevicius
  • Dalai Felinto
  • Hans Goudey
  • Iliay Katueshenock
  • Jacques Lucke
  • Simon Thommes
  • Zhen Dai

General Discussion

  • T99996: Remove object-linked materials
    • Overall seems good.
    • Simon mentioned that we need easier ways to handle set materials (e.g., a node to get current material)
    • We need to show the materials in the spreadsheet for the mesh data.
  • T100004: Add an “Exists” boolean to the named attribute input node
    • It doesn’t solve the problem with node group inputs or the attribute inputs on the modifier.
    • Dalai suggested having a node with a field input. That could work, it makes the problem more complicated, since fields can depend on multiple attributes.
      • Jacques mentioned this feels wrong.
    • It could make sense to consider this as part of the more general “defaults” or “fallback” discussion for node groups.
    • This could make sense either way though.
  • T100010: Splitting the “Transfer Attribute” node
    • Discussion will continue in the task.
    • Simon has some remarks on the amount of nodes, although most of them already exist.
    • The lack of the “transfer” name makes the workflow a bit less discoverable when you want to just transfer between two exactly similar meshes.
    • Zhen mentioned that being able to differentiate the different transfer nodes would make node graphs more readable.
  • Asset integration
    • Node group assets are planned to be integrated with the node add menu and search.
    • Dalai has made a prototype of asset integration in the node editor and for curve sculpt operators
      • Hans has started to implement the search for the add menus.
      • Adding object/collection assets in the Add Menu is a good addition
      • Adding node to the Add Menu is good too.
      • Adding node as operator is a discussion point, mainly when it comes to the mapping of operator inputs and the geometry nodes.
        • Selection
        • Active
        • 3D Cursor
        • Hair Surface
    • One of the ideas is to have brushes to be their own data-blocks.
      • Although we could have the mapping as part of the node-group, it may be overkill.
    • Operator is something in-between.
      • It could be its own asset type.
      • Its mapping is simple enough most cases that it could also be part of the node-tree.
    • Next steps:
      • Populating the Add nodes menu with nodes (Hans is working on this).
      • Get a better design for brush integration
        • Taking also into consideration the mesh sculpt and texture based brushes.
      • Explore a design to have a separate operator.

Patch Review & Decision Time

Help Needed

Next Meeting

The next meeting will be on Wednesday 24 August, 15:00-16 CEST (Your local time: 2022-08-24T13:00:00Z), which is 4 weeks from this meeting. The provisional meeting agenda will be linked in the #geometry-nodes channel before the meeting.


Dear developers, I really appreciate the work you do and happy already with the progress in Geonodes, but I’m also desperately waiting for the particle system to be updated to geonodes too!
Any (early) plans on that?

The plan is for local generic simulations to be one of the next big steps of the geometry nodes project, meaning you would build the simulation in geometry nodes, and have access to the previous frame’s data, etc. That project hasn’t started properly yet though.


Sounds good to me!
Thanks a lot!

Brush datablocks that could be saved as assets would be a god send. They already are blocks that could be purged/stored/appended/linked - having them as draggable and thumbnailable assets would be great.

Nice meeting progress!

1 Like