So what are you asking exactly? just to make sure i understand what you mean…I believe many have already asked for a low level API like in Max,Maya…etc but they are against injecting C++ code in Blender for whatever reasons like crashes…
It’s unlikely to get something like in 3ds Max, but with Everything Nodes you might be able to Make your own Nodes with Python AFAIK.
but with Everything Nodes you might be able to Make your own Nodes with Python AFAIK.
Yes that’s the point, move features for plugins. Let the blender users do some of the work themselves. Let’s not be limited by principles.
when you see the difficulty to have a simple merge modifier, you can forget your dreams about plugins in Blender.
I would love the BF go all out to add as many modifiers as possible (unlike pable says in one of his video “we don’t want/need more modifiers”).
And it’s their goal for everything nodes, but that will not come before a looooooooong time, so we can forget this too for now.
People think everything nodes will fix everything, nodes are great, I love playing with houdini, but it’s far slower than the simple and straight stack that already allow us to make great things.
The thing is that the stack lacks modifiers (merge, transforms, quadrangulate, etc)
I really hope the BF will see the potential of modifiers now and not in 2-4 years when everything nodes will just came out.
And I’m on the same page of the other post about being closed, it’s really frustrating to see how Blender can be closed when you see how software like houdini listen to pros and add what they need to make their work.
Modifiers are the power of Blender, we need them, we need more and if we have to choose the one we really need to work, IMO it would be the merge modifier first.
Yes but when? 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, more?
And nodes are slower than the stack.
But in the end it’s not about more modifiers, it’s about what we can/cannot have implemented because some X dev don’t agree with the idea (and because the idea is not possible through an addon).
Blender is supposed to be open, this problem shouldn’t exist at the first place. We should be able to propose/share/contribute our solutions to everyone
I agree, at some point, when you see a lot of users (pros) who ask for a tool, even if it’s not perfect, they can add the tool, especially a simple tool like that a dev can do in several hours or less.
There is a lot of tools that give bad performances or else and they are still there.
And indeed, modifiers are not something we can add as addons, fork or else, everybody should have them.
The Stack won’t go away, I thought people who do proceduralism stuff love nodes more than just stacking up modifiers!!
Anyway Everything Nodes is not something u can estimate as it will be rolling out slowly, first Particle Nodes as we have seen then maybe Modifiers Nodes…etc
I Understand the urge that you guys want either today but that’s something up to the Devs to decide and work on it.
I am not against anything that benefits the whole community but lets be reasonable too, there are other requests that people keep asking for. like Performance improvements, Undo system, OpenSubdiv with GPU acceleration, Asset Manager…etc it’s not simple to please everybody and give them what they want without making overall sacrifices.
not justifying anything but maybe things do need to change for the better in terms of what Devs want to work on and what users want to have.
If it was something complicated to do for a dev (undo, perfs, udim, sculpt layers, etc), I’ll say, let’s wait, but no it’s something they already use in many modifiers.
Even more if someone made a patch they just have to validate.
But the issue is that they don’t see how a merge modifier is relevant.
Not being a modeler and blocking requests from modelers isn’t cool IMO.
Tell me what you want, I’ll tell you how to do without it.
For a dev it’s just some hours of work who can save a looooooot of time for a lot of blender users.
And no, nodes are not always the best solution, most of the time you need something simple as the stack.
As a professionnal who work on Blender since years and on televisions series, publicity, games 3d intro, etc, I tell you, we really need this modifier.
Well from Campbell’s response seems it’s and possibly will be slower, so you have to put the technical need along the Artistic one too as code has to adhere to a certain standard.
I suggest you should wait and see the outcome of the discussion with the other Developers, if it’s negative then maybe start a Community Quest to get more support for it.
I don’t understand why it would slow down (it don’t on my fork), a new modifier creates a new mesh, it’s just like adding a new modifier then.
Finally, it’s not slower than adding any other modifier.
And there is nothing to wait, there is no patch, the devs are not talking about it to add it.
Ton said, make a patch and we well check if it’s relevant, but if bigs devs like Campbell or Bretch don’t see the point of this modifier, it will never append.
So, the only way would be to use a fork or to make it with Openfx.
Blender users will never want to use a fork for one modifier.
In the end we’re in a dead end and that’s never going to happen.
Wasn’t there a few years old patch though (the one that was rejected)?
yes, that one indeed.
They just don’t understand … they are no modellers … how is this possible? i can’t believe this especially because we really try so much and request it over and over again …
… they always ask the community for feedback and ask how we can improve blender … then we make a request over and over again and they don’t do anything … i really can’t understand why?
This is one of the slowest modifiers in C4D too, but it’s still there, because it’s really important. Blender is full of slow things, this is no excuse.
Up until now, I can’t see a valid reason not to add it in Blender.
There’s a difference between making and using something.
I think the main concern here is that people will use it incorrectly and then complain that blender doesn’t support high poly meshes giving blender a bad reputation and an appearance of instability.
I’m sorry but this is the worst excuse ever. It makes no sense at all.
It’s so easy like put a warning about the use, like in others modifiers.
I don’t see why it will be different from any other modifier?
Add a solidify to a scan of several millions polys, it will freeze blender and you don’t see people complaining.
When you work with a software, you are aware about limitations and implications of using modifiers.
Well then all i have left to say is good luck and hope for the best.
In the most polite way possible, I feel this is a bit melodramatic. From what Campbell has said, it sounds like the devs just don’t want to open up the barrel of constructive modelling with modifiers yet, and I understand that. During modelling nodes, this kind of stuff will be more efficient and open up the floor to different kinds of nodes for constructive modelling.
While I don’t agree with some of Campbell’s points about usability/cases to use it, I feel what he’s saying is perfectly fair.
This really sounds like it will be sorted out later during modelling nodes, meaning it’s coming eventually, and, ontop of that, he will ask the other devs what they think. That seems more than reasonable.
While I share everyone’s frustration, having needed this modifier plenty of times before, I feel that creating this thread has made a nice environment for us to keep the opinions of the community heard, and I don’t think it will go unnoticed. I think it’s just a waiting game for now.