Congrats! Can’t wait to see it in master! Thanks for the hard work!
Yep, you are right!
1 Like
I managed to supply a test build for all platforms on blender.org that contains all of the nodes of my soc project.
12 Likes
Thank you very much for your efforts. Hope the nodes will be in the master soon! 
I tried on win 10 and the inset node keeps crashing blender.
The idea as far as I know is to have modifiers done by GN, so in the modifiers menu you have the same as you have now, and when you add the modifier to an object you will see the same you see now, with the exception that you can go inside that modifier nodes and change it.
So the idea is not to have a bunch of nodes that do the same as modifiers, but to actually replace modifiers with modifiers done by nodes at some point, and with nodes that are as atomic as possible while maintaining performance.
Congrats on the work done here, good job
1 Like
Thank you for the feedback, I will take a look at it! Can describe when this happens? Directly when you insert the node?
Week 11
Here is my final report: User:Fabian Schempp/FinalReport - Blender Developer Wiki
12 Likes
Can confirm, same here.
Win 10, downloaded the build with all the new nodes few minutes ago, just default cube, add a new geometry nodes modifier, as soon as I add the inset node and connect it, blender crashes.
Ok, First of all BIG THANKS @FabianSchempp again for your work!!
I’m quickly testing every node, here is my feedback:
Mesh Extrude:
Here I tested solidify with painted weights to modulate the thickness, and then extruded the fill face, the extrude node seem to keep the original faces (the red ones), creating non manifold geometry, i think this is not expected right?
I tried again simply painting a vertex group on a plane and extruding faces, the node still keeps the original faces:
As mentioned in the picture notes, this behavior could be actually desired in some cases, maybe there could be an option checkbox (even a bool attribute) to output backfaces of the extrusion. But in my opinion, the default should be like the extrude operation in edit mode.
Solidify:
Im not sure, but I think that there is an inconsistency, with the terminology with the modifier version, Or at least a misleading/confusing use of the word “fill” IMHO, I may be wrong though.
If I understand correctly, you are calling the new faces created by the node, “fill” and “rim”.
As you can see, the mesh has a white material originally, if output selections and assign materials accordingly, I can deduce that the newly created border (green) is the “rim” and the newly created inner surface is the “fill”, am I correct?
If I disable the “rim” output, to both the new shell and the original one is assigned the green material, like they are both marked as “fill”, I would expect the original shell to keep the white material (like with the solidify modifer version):
Geometry Nodes:
Modifier:
In the modifier there is a “fill” option, under the “rim” section that, as far as I understand means “fill rim”, and the option “only rim” outputs just the filled rim, but not the internal shell (in red).
Maybe , even the terminology in the modifier is not optimal, and confusing alone, at least it confused me, maybe a better naming for the node “fill” could be “new shell” or simply “shell” to avoid this confusion?Let me know what you think.
The modifier calls it “Shell” by the way:
Another issue is that I cannot see a way of directly replicating the “Only Rim” behavior with nodes, having that would be really handy!
Not sure what “Mode: Constraints” and “Boundary” do, is that documented already?
I’ll be back soon with feedback on the other nodes!
6 Likes
Dissolve:
Seems to work ok, my only concern here is still terminology, is the “limit” word here used in the same menu with two different meanings? “Edge as a Limit” here the limit is like, “the boundary used to dissolve the geometry around” it and “Limit” alone used as a verb like “limit to unselected”. Am I correct? If it is the case, i find it confusing. What other people her think about that?
Could a possible alternative be Selected, Not Selected and Selection Border as Limit? What are the conventions for similar features in other areas of blender?
Merge By Distance:
Seems to work fine so far, a feature request for the future - It would be nice to have a couple of additional modes to “All” and “Connected”:
-
A “Border” or “Boundary” mode that only merges vertices on boundaries, I can simulate that by selecting boundary and assigning a group, but it would be great to have it builtin and automatic to avoid updating the group when changing the topology.
-
A "Not Connected mode that does exaclty the opposite of Connected, it merges only vertices from different connected shells, avoiding to collapse the vertices to the same shell when high distance is used.
Remesh Nodes, Collapse, Unsubdivide:
Look fine so far.
Mesh Inset:
As mentioned, it crashes blender on my machine, can’t give feedback, except that, as far as I understand, It’s used as an “Extrude along normals” node as well, It was hard to figure out where to find it if I looked for an extrude node. Maybe rename it “Extrude and Inset?”
UX wise I do consider an valid option to have everything in a general single extrude node with extrusion along normals, additional transform (like the current implementation), inset value and extra features like twist and subdivisions to be added in future. Let me know your thoughts about that.
5 Likes
Hi Miro, Raycast and proximity you say? I wouldn´t know where to start…do you have a nodesetup for mimicing the Shrinkwrap that you can share/screenshot?
Here is a really basic implementation:
I managed to add more features to emulate the modifier, but I don’t have the file here on this PC right now, have a look at this:
looks cool thanks, but I don´t seem to have the nodes that you have… are you using 3.0 Alpha?
Ooops, My bad, I forgot to mention that that’s the fields branch. You can find it in the experimental branches download page.
I’m currently experimenting with that, since It seems to be officially announced that the fields paradigm has been chosen to be the official design.
Any way to get topology method for the proximity node like the data transfer modifier has?
Not yet, there’s a patch though: D11835: Topology mapping mode for Attribute Transfer node
We’ve delayed a bit committing it because this node might change for the fields changes anyway, but I doubt it will be too long before that’s possible.
7 Likes
Hi, Fabian,
i’d like to ask for the status of the unsubdivide node. I need it for strawberries: (here an early version)
Thx for your reply.