Blender Thread

[Anonymous No.639653]

last one hit the bump limit >>633114
got questions? post it here
show the work that you made

[Anonymous No.639662]

>>639653
How does the Blender turn things I put in it into mush so effectively?

[Anonymous No.639709]

>>639662
It ain't called Blender for nothing, mate.

[Anonymous No.639736]

>>639653
couple of tiny addons I wrote for 2.8 while it's still in development:
* numpad slash to toggle local view: https://github.com/johnakki/blender-misc-scripts/blob/master/local-view.py
* z to toggle wireframe view: https://github.com/johnakki/blender-misc-scripts/blob/master/wireframe-view.py
don't forget to enable the 2.79 keymap in user prefs too
inb4 >why didn't you just make it into a single addon?
i'm lazy as fuck

[Anonymous No.639741]

Why does Blender cut every face in half, doubling the polygon count when I import a lowpoly model, and how do I get it to not do that?

[Anonymous No.639743]

>>639741
Are you sure the model isn't already triangulated? You can convert tris to quads with Alt+J in edit mode. You might want to press F6 and enable some of the "compare x" options.

[Anonymous No.639757]

How important is it to learn inverse kinematics? It's just a more efficient way of animating, yes? What are some scenarios where forward kinematics would be better than IK?

[Anonymous No.639771]

>>639757
I can describe this post with only one word: blasphemy.

[Anonymous No.639785]

How can I use cycles' procedural noise to make moving/flowing textures, kind of like water?

[Anonymous No.639789]

>>639743
I seem to be able to fix it that way after importing to another blender project but this is going to be a problem when moving it to another engine.

[Anonymous No.639791]

>>639785
you have an ocean simulation modifier, it can do that

[Anonymous No.639794]

>>639757
FK is a preferred method for animating expressive arms, legs, fingers because it moves the way human or character joints would move in the real world. We primarily move through rotations and its easiest to capture realistic performance through rotations, we don't have many sliding joints in our body. However, the problem with FK comes in whenever we need to express weight on an object, for example when taking the footstep, or in case of the arm resting it on something like table. It is possible to make a good static position, hovewer when the character moves or shifts, the entire arm going to move so we will have to counter-animate that hierarchical movement, and it's really a lot of work to do for what would appear the hand standing in one place. In these situations we would want to use IK.
The way IK works is that the top of hierarchy is actually independent from the bottom of the chain, so when you move it, everything in-between is solved by the computer.
Any time we have weight being planted and we need the body to move around it, IK will be preferred. Hovewer, IK has it's downsides too. It's actually really difficult to get realistic animation when you are not resting your weight, for example just gesturing with your arms, doing very rotational-based movement like martial arts. The reason it's going to be difficult to make that look realistic is that because we are not actually animating using rotations, but rather using translations(movement). If I move arm forward, it will really just slide forward and the elbow is following in-between. That's not really the way people or characters move, we would actually rotate into that position so we will have to counter-animate that coming down and up and over to mimic that movement and it can be very difficult to make it look naturalistic.
For these reasons you need to understand and apply both IK and FK in their respective situations.

[Anonymous No.639795]

>>639794
>FK is a preferred method for animating expressive arms, legs, fingers because it moves the way human or character joints would move in the real world
For a two-joint system without stretch, IK can create every possible way to reach a given point
What even is this paragraph

[Anonymous No.639796]

>>639795
I took it from a rigging tutorial, the guy seemed solid and professional enough to be trusted

[Anonymous No.639798]

>>639796
I understand what you/the guy means and I sort of agree contextually, but it is sort of oddly phrased. Yes, when you animate a location like an IK target, it does not interpolate rotations, however (when needed) a few points are enough to define a curve in space that (for example) a hand will follow, and the way animals move is rather with regard to intended position (where do I want my hand to go), not rotation (how do I want to rotate my shoulder), and sometimes you do indeed move your hand in a rather straight path (because that's the shortest path and there's no need to flail around when you are trying to reach something)
So it is just a matter of interpolation in animation, but even then IK is a convenience for defining core poses (in a good rig you can snap FK to IK and vice versa). And interpolated rotations aren't automatically better-looking.

[Anonymous No.639801]

>>639653
does anyone know if there's an option to have objects show transparent like pic in 2.8? the current option for when you press z in 2.8 just doesn't do it for me

[Anonymous No.639803]

>>>639801
nvm, >>639736 has an addon for that, thanks anon

[Anonymous No.639809]

Why are there no fbx, obj and other options on my import/export in blender 2.8 ???

[Anonymous No.639817]

>>639795
>>639798
In short: you're retarded.

Even though anon here >>639794 took his info from a tutorial, it's absolutely spot on.
You should really only use IK for two things: legs and arms when the hands are resting/grabbing something fixed, but mostly legs.
In every other case you use FK.

>the way animals move is rather with regard to intended position (where do I want my hand to go), not rotation (how do I want to rotate my shoulder)
No.
This is as wrong as saying that 1+1=3.
It's just fucking wrong and you should feel bad for arguing that it's not.

Arms animated in IK are instantly recognizable. They fucking suck and look unnatural. Because that's literally the way you move a puppet. And puppets are as deep into uncanny valley as it gets.

Also, arcs.
Try managing arcs with IK. Go on. Make my day.
Fuck, I'm not even an animator and I got angry reading your post.

[Anonymous No.639819]

>you need a fucking addon to turn a fucking wireframe mode on
what in the fuck

[Anonymous No.639821]

>>639817
Unfortunately you didn't understand what I wrote, so you're getting angry at nothing. Please calm down, it's not healthy. I literally talked about interpolation of rotation vs. translation in my post, as well as snapping IK to FK, it's right there.

However a even a rudimentary understanding of mechanics should be enough to understand that, as I said, a 2-joint 2-bone system, such as arms and legs, with a given end effector target has all its possible valid configurations available via an IK solver. So "using FK" to define poses (which is core animation work) is actually a waste of time.

I've also never heard of someone attempting to move their hand by thinking about how they're going to rotate their shoulder, except in rehabilitation after a stroke. Your perception of the world is wild

[Anonymous No.639828]

>>639736
anon are you fucking kidding me

the wireframe addon doesnt make it so that if you select a edge above another one at an angle where you would get both in 2.79 using something like the circle tool it doesnt also select the bottom one? what's the point of wireframe being a thing then? that's the whole point of it

[Anonymous No.639831]

>>639819
You don't.

[Anonymous No.639833]

>>639831
as far as I know you do for 2.8, unless you want that shitty half transparent wireframe

[Anonymous No.639838]

>>639833
You mean this? It can still work like before if you tick this checkbox. Don't know why they changed it, maybe it can be reverted somewhere in the preferences.

[Anonymous No.639840]

>>639838
oh wow thank you, I might attempt making a script to bing z to that

[Anonymous No.639843]

>>639821
>except in rehabilitation after a stroke
>hurr durr
There's a reason why that is. Because that's how it works. But you're so used to it that you don't "think" about doing it. It makes sense that in the case of rehab from a stroke they would have to go through the very basics of motion.

>So "using FK" to define poses (which is core animation work) is actually a waste of time.
No.
Because IK should only be used in very specific cases.
In all other cases, FK is a better choice for it is much easier to make the character flow into a natural pose, even in regards to both the previous and next pose. Arcs, my friend.
You're trying to argue that it's easier to describe an arc by directly drawing it (ie using IK) instead of using a pair of compasses (ie using FK).
It's not.
It's math and it's not an opinion.

[Anonymous No.639849]

>>639843
I think we're simply talking about different types of motions. I was talking about intentional movements toward a point (which is what IK does), which includes things such as grabbing, pointing, reaching, or linear extensions (a forward punch). Of course when you are doing a jazzy dance or an uppercut you are not moving in terms of simply intending your end effector towards a target point, in fact the end effector can also become irrelevant and simply follow along (which then does not meet the criterion of intentionality I mentioned before and in my previous post)
We don't need to fight today over a non-disagreement.

[Anonymous No.639857]

>>639817
FK is literally not a thing anymore thanks to IK.

FK is like old shitty FPS's, IK is what they do now and why they have weight.

[Anonymous No.639860]

How do I bake procedural textures into a UV map and Normal map in Blender?
Video accompanying your explanation would be useful if you know of any.

[Anonymous No.639867]

>>639819
..or you could just press Z, pineapplefriend.

[Anonymous No.639872]

>>639785
Sadly there isn't a random seed value for noise so you'll have to animate the texture coordinates instead. This works best on flat objects if you animate on the axis perpendicular to the surface.
Animated textures don't work in the viewport, Blender Internal (or Eevee when I last checked) but do work in cycles.
>>639796
Lol
>>639809
They're all handled by addons which have not yet been updated. Use 2.79 for import, save the .blend then open on 2.8. To export from 2.8, save the .blend and append it in 2.79 then export as normal.
>>639819
>>639828
>Alpha software
>>639838
Cool, I'll update the addon to enable that too when I get chance
>>639867
Does that work for you in 2.8? Are you using the default keymap or 2.79? How recent is the build that you're using?

[Anonymous No.639905]

>>639843
>You're trying to argue that it's easier to describe an arc by directly drawing it (ie using IK) instead of using a pair of compasses (ie using FK).
interesting analogy
elbow\shoulder motion required to draw an arc is very natural, fast and is actually the easiest stroke in 2d drawing, but it lacks precision unless trained
while compasses are much more accurate but lacks speed
with all my rather limited experience in animation, this actually relates since I use IK to capture big picture fast and rough(easier for me to drag chains like a puppet on a string than to go through hierarchy and rotate them in place), then I copy IK to FK and refine with precision and detail... but this applies only to static poses desu

[Anonymous No.639907]

>>639872
oh, texture co-ordinates, right okay

>>639791
unfortunately it only seems to be good for well, oceans. I'm after the creation of small, relatively peaceful bodies of water

[Anonymous No.639908]

What should a spine rig look like? Should there even be any controllers? I checked out a few standard rigs and they don't seem to have anything special. Is that the way to go?

[Anonymous No.639914]

How can I fix that shit?

[Anonymous No.639933]

What's going on with these black triangles? I've recalculated normals, normal display shows them all pointing outwards, smooth shading is on, I've removed all doubles, and the mesh is all quads. I'm at a loss.

[Anonymous No.639940]

>>639914
what the hell are those lines anyway? it could be anything. give me some context
>>639933
is the model triangulated? if not subdivide and see if theres any difference.
id bet my money its just a bad lightning setup more than anything

[Anonymous No.639945]

Can I get some webms demonstrating the new UI?

[Anonymous No.639948]

>>639933
Terminator issue? Just subdivide more, ideally at render-time, until those annoying shadows disappear.

[Anonymous No.639962]

What's a good place to look for interesting/fun 'free' addons? Some people on this board talk about CGpeers but it's closed registration / having site issues.
Any recommendations on what add-ons are 'must haves'?

[Anonymous No.639963]

>>639962
check blendermarket

[Anonymous No.639968]

>>639962
I'm working on an add-on that, once installed, will remove Blender from your computer. It still got some kinks to iron out (mostly have to do with permissions in system-wide installs), but I'm confident that it'll be an immediate hit once it's released.

[Anonymous No.639971]

>>639962
>Any recommendations on what add-ons are 'must haves'?

well i can recommend of some "luxury" plugins that are aimed for professionals, these are my most coveted plugins

https://blendermarket.com/products/pro-lighting-studio

https://www.blendermarket.com/products/hardopsofficial

https://blendermarket.com/products/cycles-material-vault-volume-1

https://blendermarket.com/products/sculpttkt---a-tool-kit-for-sculptors

https://blendermarket.com/products/bpainter

https://blendermarket.com/products/auto-rig-pro

https://blendermarket.com/products/retopoflow

https://blendermarket.com/products/asset-management

https://blendermarket.com/products/ue4-export-helper

https://blendermarket.com/products/artistic-painter

[Anonymous No.639981]

How do I keep the pose but delete the armature/bones?
I try to apply visual transform but if I delete the bones it goes back to the default pose

[Anonymous No.639982]

Please help me!

I've made a simple animation (a brick falling from a shelf made with rigid body simulation) on one computer and I want to render it on another computer.
On the first computer animation is working just fine and I've rendered out first few frames without any problems. So I've saved my project file and my textures into a new folder and I copied that folder to another computer.
But on my second computer animation isn't working! The models and textures are just fine, but every single frame looks like frame 0. In proprieties of my brick I can clearly see that rigid body is turned on, but there still is no simulation going on.

I don't know why it's not working and I don't even know what to google. Any tips?

[Anonymous No.639989]

>>639982
is the animation working in the timeline? if it does, its probably the render settings

[Anonymous No.639992]

>>639989
goto dopesheet, action editor and find your animation. then click the F button to save it.

now it will be stored in your blender file

[Anonymous No.639993]

>>639982
>>639992
Thanks guys! No, the animation wasn't working even in the timeline, but your solution fixed that! Now everything works just fine - I really appreciate your help.

[Anonymous No.639995]

>>639962
CGPeers is just an offshoot of CGPersia (the forum is the main place, not the main site)

[Anonymous No.639998]

Is there a way to make my computer turn itself off automatically after Blender finishes rendering?

[Anonymous No.640001]

>>639998
found this, good luck

https://blenderartists.org/t/addon-alarm-and-shutdown/609848

[Anonymous No.640026]

>>640001
Thanks!

[Anonymous No.640031]

>>639914
>>639940
>give me some context
Texture (just straight lines in this case) looks fine in 3dview but so curved and fucked up in render.

[Anonymous No.640038]

>>640031
looks like it's problem with subdivision modifier.

[Anonymous No.640053]

>>640031
oh that's probably some doodles you made in another layer that is still active.

go to your paint mode, and in the left panel click slots and see whats active. you can do the same in the normal texture stack

[Anonymous No.640054]

>>640053
Well, there is another 3 textures I use in this materials but how can they do that distortion?

[Anonymous No.640055]

>>640054
its simple, you painted on the model and nothing was shown in the viewport (at the time). but your UV's were getting painted.
go through your textures in the UV window and check, or use the preview in the material stack

[Anonymous No.640056]

>>640055
I still don't get it. Yeah I see what I painted on model, i see it in another window (with material shading mode) and I see it in UV window as well.

[Anonymous No.640058]

>>640055
>you painted on the model and nothing was shown in the viewport (at the time). but your UV's were getting painted.
All hail Blender!

[Anonymous No.640068]

>>640056
ok, what does it matter now? just delete the doodle.
next time when you paint have it on material mode with basic light.
>>640058
epig

[Anonymous No.640076]

>>640068
Delete what doodle? I don't understand what are you talking about.
What the difference between material and texture mod for painting?

[Anonymous No.640077]

>>640076
>What the difference between material and texture mod for painting?

let me explain it all so it makes sense

solid view - you can't view the texture (only until you tick, solid textured in the right panel). so its best to NOT paint in it

textured view - will show texture. this will only work if you select the desired texture in UV editor mode, while in edit mode. you SHOULD NOT use that

material view - displays both the material and texture in the viewport. and is the most MOST ideal for any kind of work. will only work if the texture is attached to a material. and you can modify the material in many different ways, like shadeless mode, to display it differently. usually coupled with a simple point light (however hemi is best for painting, because its a global illuminator)

tl;dr use only material mode to display anything, both other mods can display textures but only under certain conditions.
i know it fucks you up but 2.8 will change that.

[Anonymous No.640083]

>>640077
Oh boi, just tried to paint with material shading and it works fine. Thanks for patience.
I guess there is no way to fix existing texture?

[Anonymous No.640085]

>>640083
you probably can't use the history stack anymore, so scratch that and start over

[Anonymous No.640115]

I'm on Debian stable and I want to get into the 2.8 alpha, what kind of dependencies does the installer, they have on their site, put on my system? Does it override anything? Is it self contained like an appimage? Will Blender 2.8 be shipped as an appimage in the future, because I don't think they'll port it to stable.

[Anonymous No.640243]

I want to make a render of an object that isn't transprent, but with a transparent kinda effect so it lets the user see what's behind the object. Like a plane with a sphere behind, and I want it to render the plane mostly as it is, but with an effect so that the sphere is visible.

If I do standard transparency mixing on the plane it kinda works, but I don't want the whole plane to be transprent because that ruins the original material. I've tried assigning just the faces where the sphere would appear to a transparent version of the material, but then it looks blocky.

How would I go about doing this? Is there some kinda trickery I could do with compositing?

[Anonymous No.640245]

>>640243
its called translucent. but the effect is very mild.
however im not sure what you mean by "transparent, but not transparent. you should provide an example

[Anonymous No.640276]

>>637320
I'm currently building a new computer for a 3D workstation and wanted to utilize GPU rendering, but I am torn between the RX 580 8GB and the GTX 1060 6GB.

>XFX Radeon RX 580 GTS XXX Edition (8GB) - $249.99
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y66K3XD/

>GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1060 (6GB) - $279.99
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125962

Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.640277]

>>639653
I'm currently building a new computer for a 3D workstation and wanted to utilize GPU rendering, but I am torn between the RX 580 8GB and the GTX 1060 6GB.

>XFX Radeon RX 580 GTS XXX Edition (8GB) - $249.99
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y66K3XD/

>GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 1060 (6GB) - $279.99
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125962

Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.640281]

>>639653
I am currently building a new computer for a 3D workstation and wanted to utilize GPU rendering, but I am torn between the RX 580 8GB and the GTX 1060 6GB. The RX 580 costs $249.99 and the GTX 1060 costs $279.99.

>RX 580 (8GB)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B06Y66K3XD/

>GTX 1060 (6GB)
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125901

If it matters, I'm going to be using an AMD Ryzen 5 2600 with a B450 motherboard.

[Anonymous No.640293]

>>640281
>A 3d workstation
>Amd CPU
>Amd GPU
>AN AMD GPU
You fucked up.
Not only 30 dollars shouldn't be that much of a difference that you would seriously consider giving up CUDA acceleration just to save 30 bucks, but that whole rig is more suitable as an average gaming setup rather than a workstation.

[Anonymous No.640298]

>>640293
Doesn't Blender support OpenCL acceleration?

[Anonymous No.640301]

>>640298
yes but its like 25% of what cuda is capable of

[Anonymous No.640305]

>>639971
Certainly retopoflow and probably some others are up on GitHub so you don't actually have to pay for them - it's just nice obviously to support the developers if you can

[Anonymous No.640309]

answering questions from the previous thread

>>639767
use the snapping tool
>>640303
you can take 1 screw, use array until you get a row of screw's in life, then use the simple deform modifier and bend it 360 degrees

[Anonymous No.640310]

>>640309
already made a curve alligned in a circle and added curve modifier to screw and array

[Anonymous No.640312]

>>639945
Download it yourself you lazy fuck
>>640115
Download the nightly, unzip, run. If you want to compile it yourself instead, follow the instructions in the wiki but run install_deps.sh with --build-all to prevent it installing anything systemwide. Be aware that this will take a loooong time.

[Anonymous No.640313]

beginner question, is there a way i can make the bottom edge scale to the size of the top edge?

other than deleting the bottom and just extruding the top edge, im thinking of this as to use for maybe more complicated model in the future

[Anonymous No.640315]

>>640313
lattice deform, or clone top face, put it where the bottom is, remove bottom face, bridge clone to mantle and remove the new mantle edge, and you should have a straight cylinder.

There's pretty much no reliable way to snap scale outside of lattice warp and even then only if your shit is properly aligned.

[Anonymous No.640318]

>>640313
you can snap the top cap to the bottom cap with snapping tool. while scaling.
not sure if that works properly

[Anonymous No.640319]

>>640313
Snap to vertex, scale with shift + z

[Anonymous No.640321]

With a mirror modifier on a mesh is it possible to mark only some of the faces as having mirrored UVs? I have a few faces that are a separate material and I want them to have non-mirrored UVs. But the rest of the faces I want to keep mirrored.

[Anonymous No.640325]

>>640321
unwrap the none-mirrored part in a different UV channel.
not sure what you want to achieve, you don't have to unwrap the whole character at once, you can first unwrap the mirrored part, then when your'e done you add the different part to the map

[Anonymous No.640349]

>>640312
Thanks but that doesn't answer the question if the binaries they have on the site overwrite any libs on my system or are they self contained?

>Be aware that this will take a loooong time.

UE compiled in a few hours and it has about 50GB of binaries. Blender shouldn't take more than 20 min

[Anonymous No.640352]

>>640349
Yes it does. Which part of unzipping and running from a folder is ambiguous to you?

[Anonymous No.640360]

This completely befuddles me. Why can a material only have 18 textures? it seems so arbitrary to me. I want to have dozens of facial features to toggle off and on as I please conveniently and easy, but apparently it's impossible.

>but anon, you can perform one of the various ghetto-ass workarounds to get what you want!
>You can just change the image source when you want to use a different expression
>You can have a bunch of loose Texture nodes and just string them in place to change your features
>You can make a big long single texture and adjust the Y-axis value to cycle through the different facial features
>You can change the model's Material to have 18 more textures

I don't like that bullshit. I just want to have a big easy list of textures that can be toggled off and on with checkboxes.

[Anonymous No.640364]

>>640360
>Why can a material only have 18 textures? it seems so arbitrary to me.
Have you ever seen a donut which required more than 18 textures to be properly reproduced in 3D?

[Anonymous No.640365]

>>640360
>>You can make a big long single texture and adjust the Y-axis value to cycle through the different facial features

this is standard practice
if you are too lazy to move the uv over and over just make uv channels and flip between them

[Anonymous No.640366]

>>640365
or or, just give me more than 18 slots. it isn't like I'll ever have more than a few enabled at any given time, so it shouldn't affect render times. I just want a big convenient list with ghetto workarounds

[Anonymous No.640375]

Anyone here have FLIP fluids?
I'd be willing to trade something I've bought a while back.

Pic related.
It's called Toonkit. It's been pretty worth it, for what I needed it for. Only works with CPU render though, so if you're looking to use GPU for speed on it you're SoL. It gives a shit ton more control though compared to using Blender Internernal and trying to fiddle with shit to get toon/NPR shading.

[Anonymous No.640379]

>>640375
Don't bother with FLIP. Check out Mantaflow instead.

[Anonymous No.640390]

>>640379
I checked that out, but I can't figure out how/where to download it. I see shit about compiling it and forking the source and stuff, but I figured that's just for people who want to muck around with the code.

[Anonymous No.640395]

>>640352

I don't know why your dumbass thinks simply unzipping a file and running it's contents implies it overwriting the libs on your computer. It's clear to me you don't understand what I was asking.

[Anonymous No.640535]

Okay, how do I delete a vertex group?

[Anonymous No.640546]

>>640305
Is the recent version of AutoRig Pro on there? BPainter? ToonKit?

[Anonymous No.640547]

>>639968
Does this add-on also remove system32?

[Anonymous No.640548]

>>640546
>AutoRig Pro
Just use https://www.mixamo.com/
>BPainter
https://www.foundry.com/products/mari/non-commercial
>ToonKit
https://blenderartists.org/t/blender-2-8-lanpr-gsoc-2018/1115003/86

[Anonymous No.640552]

>>640547
I've contemplated it, but it seems like too much work for now. My most recent build, however, is capable of (optionally) installing Maya after deleting Blender.

[Anonymous No.640565]

>>640548
autorig is much better than mixamo
and bpainter is a texture tool for stylized things

[Anonymous No.640566]

>>640565
>autorig is much better than mixamo
Is just the same, does autorig have a collection of animations too?
>and bpainter is a texture tool for stylized things
JUst like mari, if you want more procedural things you have Substance Painter, they have a free student version for one year too ...

[Anonymous No.640567]

I'm making a character for a game. The character uses a boomerang, how should I animate that? I want the boomerang to be on the characters belt for most animations, and then when it's an attack animation the boomerang is in their hand and is thrown and returned. But I don't know how to animate all that. I can animate a character with bones just fine, but having the separate boomerang and attaching it to different things throughout all the animations is what confuses me.

[Anonymous No.640568]

>>640567
use the action editor to add different action, watch a tutorial about it.
for hiding/spawning the weapon im not sure. but if you have a belt it might be possible to do without hiding the mesh at all.
if you want to hide certain meshes during animation you need to keyframe alpha transparency like in here
https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/56871/antimation-how-to-make-object-visible-then-invisible

in unity, to make the weapon actually *hit* you need to tinker with trigger collider

[Anonymous No.640571]

>>640568
I am using the action editor to create the character animations. I already have idle, running, jumping, etc. It's just animating the boomerang with all this that I don't understand. I tried adding a keyframe for the location/rotation of the boomerang. But the keyframe seems to affect both the character armature and the boomerang object.

[Anonymous No.640574]

>>640571
is the boomerang part of your rig? if so then try to change keyframe mode to "whole character", btw you don't need to have the same rig for both

[Anonymous No.640575]

pls rate this.

[Anonymous No.640576]

>>640575
Better than nothing.

gangbangre

[Anonymous No.640577]

>>640574
No, I thought it would be weird if there were a boomerang bone or something like that. I figured it would be easier to keep the boomerang as a separate object not parented to the amateur, and just animate its transform directly since it wont be deforming or anything.

[Anonymous No.640580]

>>640577
i would keep it part of your rig just to make sure it won't be fucked in unity

[Anonymous No.640581]

>>640580
I guess so. Is it really this difficult to add keyframes for separate objects in Blender?

[Anonymous No.640582]

>>640575
Best girl

[Anonymous No.640584]

>>639653
I've imported image as a plane, cut it in parts, solidified etc.
Now I wanted to remove that image material and add solid color but it just keeps its original texture. I've removed all materials from objects and there is bunch of unnamed textures in them that I can't do anything about.
How do I make all the objects just one color without any texture or UVs?

[Anonymous No.640585]

>>640581
no, this is not the problem. the problem is that unity tends to read object animation completely wrong.
as long as your object has a rig, its safe from unwanted deformations in unity.
just set your weights to 1, it would be the same as animating still objects.
for the other issue that you have - i suggested the "whole character" keyset. not sure if it solves the problem. if not - try to set a new root bone and bind your boomerang to it

[Anonymous No.640606]

>>640576
>>640582
how bout now?

[Anonymous No.640607]

>program wants to pretend I fucked something up
>too far in to undo history

[Anonymous No.640608]

Anyone got any idea why this driver expression isn't working?

[Anonymous No.640642]

>>639971
Thoughts on Voxel Heat Diffuse?

https://www.blendermarket.com/products/voxel-heat-diffuse-skinning

The Auto-Rig creator seems to really dig it.

[Anonymous No.640643]

>>640606
looks like pre-playstation1 era

[Anonymous No.640649]

Anyone know why this simple bulb shape is unwrapping into this spiral instead of neatly like the incomplete sphere does?

[Anonymous No.640667]

>>640643
There was no such thing for this style of 3D models. The PS1 hardware was envisioned in '93 and came out in '94, as a transition there is the 3D on earlier systems. The 3DO could push some nicely textured models in '93/'94, just not with the speed of PS1. On PC we mostly had flat shaded/gouraud shaded stuff at the time, because textures are expensive to draw on PC hardware of the time. Only with faster machines like the P1 we saw the jump in quality.

Long story short, it fits the PS1 era even if it's not very sophisticated. It's the type of model you would choose for a wide shot, not for closeups.

[Anonymous No.640669]

>>640649
In object mode apply scale and rotation (ctrl+a), after that unwrap again

[Anonymous No.640671]

>>640649
In object mode apply scale and rotation (ctrl+a), after that unwrap again

[Anonymous No.640691]

>>640642
looks cool

[Anonymous No.640717]

FLIP fluids looks good, really.
but with such big addon, i want to see how well it integrates to 2.8 first. if 2.8 hits and it will break there then its money well wasted. plus we know that we can just buy houdini instead which is not buggy like a plugin

[Anonymous No.640730]

>>640717
>plus we know that we can just buy houdini instead
Most Blender users don't know this.

[Anonymous No.640734]

Any free alternative for Hard Ops plugin?

[Anonymous No.640735]

>>640730
I rather not pay 300 per month for an occasional twiddle.

[Anonymous No.640736]

>>640734
Hard Ops doesn't actually do anything core Blender doesn't. You just have to click more buttons to achieve the same results.

[Anonymous No.640738]

>>640736
Hard Ops does boolean operations while actually maintaining proper topology.

If you do it by hand, you'll have to retopo it all.

[Anonymous No.640741]

>>640735
Actually, it's $400 for two years. And whoever buys Houdini is most probably not doing 3D as just a hobby.

[Anonymous No.640745]

What are some good tutorials for learning the Blender sculpting tools?

[Anonymous No.640746]

>>640738
Honestly haven't seen the latest videos but, most of what Hard Ops do can be archived without the addon, are just a bunch of macros to speed the workflow, mira tools, automirror, easy lattice, bool tool and the Bevel after boolean are all free addons, Hard Ops had a nice library of meshes I think, that's all

[Anonymous No.640747]

>>640745
to do things like that
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZnUgt659oI

[Anonymous No.640748]

>>640745
Zacharias Reinhardt
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWWybvw9jnpOdJq_6wTHryA

YanSculpts
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfjswDVU0XHyBN7UFG0Mi5Q

Plenty of resources there, to get you started...

[Anonymous No.640760]

>>640734
FastCarve. Not as comprehensive, but does the same basic functions as HardOps (booleans and autobevelling).

>>640736
>>640746
Yeah, HardOps just binds a bunch of otherwise macro-less tools to macros so they're easily accessible. For example, HardOps' sharpening would require identifying all edges of x°, assigning them a sharp edge, a bevel weight of 1, shading the object as smooth and enabling autosmoothed normals. It's all achievable manually, but HardOps just allows it all to be done by pressing Q in object mode.

>>640738
I don't believe so. I use HardOps quite often and its boolean functions entirely rely on the existing boolean modifier, it just changes the boolean object's maximum draw to wire rather than full. I could be wrong though, since I'm still on an older version.

[Anonymous No.640767]

How does SpeedRetopo compare to Retopoflow as a free alternative?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFfqePn8nKI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFAqXENpKLY

He also authored Retopo MT, but he only speaks french in the video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=op2rMKDEUzQ

[Anonymous No.640768]

>>640734
Hard Ops is GPL, so it's free. The most recent version available on CGPeers is 0093.

[Anonymous No.640771]

Hey guys. Thinking of trying out blender. Should i start out with 2.7 or 2.8 version?

[Anonymous No.640779]

>>640767
if you can auto-merge and automatically lay strips then its the same.
that's the whole point of a dedicated retopo tool. its not so far from a regular retopo tool

[Anonymous No.640785]

>>640771
Try Autodesk Maya. They took the Blender core, tweaked it, called it BlendShapes, and built a fucking whole modeling and animation suite on top of it.

[Anonymous No.640797]

>>640785
Don't listen to this guy. If you want a reliable tool without a shit UI, get Blender 2.8

[Anonymous No.640798]

>>639857
You can't just IK everything, you know that right? One of the most important principles in animation is arcing shit. And arcs are accomplished through FK.

[Anonymous No.640799]

>>640575
Head's not big enough.

[Anonymous No.640805]

>>640797
Is 2.8 fully usable yet without a fuck-ton of problems?
I've downloaded it and fucked around with Eevee and some of the new features, but I haven't bothered to start a full on project with it because I'm afraid it'll shit the bucket and I won't be able to use 2.79 instead.
That, and the loss of layers into the "collections" is doing my head in. I get why they've implemented the new system, but I can't say I'm a fan of it yet. Though I already was doing something similar with the layers to begin with. Left 10, all parts of the scene to be rendered, right 10 being assets and shit.

I've got to admit, Eevee is pretty dang cool, though it doesn't seem to work with roughness/reflections as well as I had thought. SSR is either on or off, with no real influence by roughness maps.

[Anonymous No.640806]

Hey, I'm fairly new to blender, and 3D in general, but the guru's infamous doughnut videos helped me get familiar with the software, so now it doesn't look that scary, but I've ran into a small problem
Is it alright, if I put one mesh into anothe, even if they're not overlapping each other, like pic related, or do I have to do some sort of boolean technique in order to make one of the (the head most presumably) hollow?

[Anonymous No.640808]

Made a hat. Trying to escape the uncanny valley.

[Anonymous No.640809]

>>640806
thays how it should be

[Anonymous No.640814]

Hallo, friends.

I decided to pick up Blender to try and make some custom sized walls for Second Life.

I managed to get this far, but the faces are going wonky. I created material "layers" for the faces I wanted, but in-world, this is what I get.

[Anonymous No.640815]

Hallo, friends.

I decided to pick up Blender to try and make some custom sized walls for Second Life.

I managed to get this far, but the faces are going wonky. I created material "layers" for the faces I wanted, but in-world, this is what I get.

[Anonymous No.640816]

>>640815
what the hell are material layers?

[Anonymous No.640817]

>>640815

Everything looks okay (to me) in Blender. Problem is, I don't even know how to describe this problem to try and look up how to fix it in Google. Could anyone point me in the right direction?

[Anonymous No.640819]

>>640816

I'm not sure that's the right name for it. I just defined three different faces. The faces translate properly, but when I try to apply a texture to a face, it goes ballistic.

[Anonymous No.640821]

>>640819
an object should only have 1 material, and 1 texture (usually)
what you did here is not textures, that's just materials in different colors

[Anonymous No.640829]

>>640815
>>640817
edit mode, select everything with A and recalculate your normals pressing ctr+n

[Anonymous No.640830]

what are my options for a hard surface workflow in this program?
is blender's sculpting up to par, or is traditional modeling/bevel workflow still the way to go?

what's the "standard" in 2018?

[Anonymous No.640831]

>>640819
>>640817
rendering error is probably due to that fucked up ngon around the doorway.

[Anonymous No.640834]

>>639653
Testing meshroom photo scanner and blender

[Anonymous No.640874]

hop in the backseat

[Anonymous No.640888]

>>640607
Just increase the number of Undo Steps, my man.

[Anonymous No.640889]

How do I decide weather to apply my subsurface modifier to a character model to be used for animation?
I've never done character animation in Blender so excuse the ignorance.

[Anonymous No.640890]

>>640806
having them penetrate is fine, but the best way to model is to make the parts as they really would be in real life. That way you will get nice shadows in the nooks and crannies. Also try and model everything with the least amount of resolution as possible, and only smooth or (sub-divide) at render time.

[Anonymous No.640892]

>>640888
wut, how do you do that?
>>640889
you never apply it, unless for exporting for baking

[Anonymous No.640896]

>>640806
>>640890
If you're making game assets, intersecting helps for performance.

[Anonymous No.640897]

>>640896
Even when making game assets you should be deriving normal maps and everything from photo real models.

[Anonymous No.640901]

>>640892
User preferences -> Editing -> Undo

Then set it to a number you like or set the maximum memory usage for Undo Steps.

[Anonymous No.640904]

>>640890
>>640896
I thought intersecting meshes like that was always bad, is there any way to model it like that and then make it hollow with topology that flows nicely?

[Anonymous No.640911]

>>640904
How do you think clothes are applied to models? Especially game models where you can change your clothing/armor?

>>640897
lolwat? Sweety, games don't have to look photo-realistic.

[Anonymous No.640912]

>>640911
>lolwat? Sweety, games don't have to look photo-realistic
lol who even gives a shit about games? Im talking about high quality photo real film models. Not baby modeling.

[Anonymous No.640914]

>>640767
I use both. One for organic, the other hard surface.

[Anonymous No.640915]

>>640797
Blender 2.8's UI is arguably worse than 2.79's. A lot of "basic every day" shit isn't visible within context.

I'll never understand the "blender is bad UI" meme. Nobody has ever given an exampel.

[Anonymous No.640918]

>>640915
the blender team is simply incapable of making good UI.

this can be demonstrated in alot of different things, for example - opening and closing viewports is challenging for no good reason. why would you ever want to close a viewport from both sides?
you can tell that whoever made the UI are programmers, not UI designers.
another example, in the left panel you have buttons that can be used for modeling. but for some reason alot of the basic modeling functions are in the specials menu for no good reason. you have "push/pull,smooth vertex,randomize,noise and lot of crazy shit i never heard about. what if they replaced those with bevel,bridge and inset?

[Anonymous No.640920]

>>640797

Blender is unreliable, FBX support is SHIT (I never get tired of the daily "blender animations won't export properly in unreal" on UE forums). It's also funny to see blendlets begging devs from various apps to support blender with their plugins (which never happens because of your shit license).

Blender will always be pleb tier. You may as well learn good and useful software.

[Anonymous No.640923]

>>640892
What if you need to apply a subsurface modifier so that the shape keys are more malleable though?
Or is there a better way to do that?

[Anonymous No.640924]

>>640912
He was modeling a hand axe. Chances are that was a game asset.

[Anonymous No.640925]

>>640918
t. brainet

Blender's 2.7 UI is fine, it's just not tailored for brainlets like yourself.

[Anonymous No.640928]

How do I render glass without fireflies or it being too noisy even after 4000+ samples? All of my google searches yield advice that removes too much detail that I don't even consider fine detail.

[Anonymous No.640929]

>>640925
i use only hotkeys so i don't have a problem with that.
but im just pointing that out

[Anonymous No.640935]

>>640928
In short, it's impossible. Tricks do exist, but in terms of bruteforced rendering, you just can't. It's one of Cycles' biggest downfalls, the fact that after so long no one's optimised Cycles for glass rendering.
Few tricks:
Clamping. It helps to cull fireflies, but can disturb other elements in your scene such as bright lights and depth of field.
The shadow ray trick. Take your glass material, a mix node and a transparent shader. Get in a Light Path input and plug Is Shadow Ray into the mix node's factor. This stops the glass from having any shadows, which stops it from having caustics, which is what causes the bulk of the noise. You lose shadows and caustics through this method, but it eliminates a lot of noise in turn.

[Anonymous No.640936]

>>640928
just do low-sample render and punch the denoiser button.

[Anonymous No.640939]

>>640925
it's just not tailored for brainlets like yourself.

Exactly, it's tailored for blendlets like yourself.

[Anonymous No.640944]

>>640928
Use a different render engine.

[Anonymous No.640945]

>>640939
>can't even greentext

[Anonymous No.640949]

>>640939
>doesn't know how to greentext
Idiot.

[Anonymous No.640952]

Is it possible to adjust particle hair strands like regular curves or am I doomed to using the brush tools?

[Anonymous No.640961]

Im slowly learning.

[Anonymous No.640965]

>>640952
go to particle edit from object mode and you can brush the hair

[Anonymous No.640966]

>>640952
you can use curves as particles. (or just about anything) just make it part of a group and select it

[Anonymous No.640982]

>>639653
second thing I made after watching tutorials on youtube

[Anonymous No.640983]

>>640982
add some more lights bro

[Anonymous No.640997]

>>640983
k

[Anonymous No.641005]

I am very new to Linux and am using Linux Mint 19. I tried to download Blender but I could not find an installer amongst the extracted files.

Can someone explain how to install Blender onto Linux Mint 19 to someone new to Linux?

[Anonymous No.641006]

>>641005
https://askubuntu.com/questions/110821/how-to-install-blender-from-the-official-website

maybe this would help

[Anonymous No.641008]

>>641006
>https://askubuntu.com/questions/110821/how-to-install-blender-from-the-official-website
Blender can be installed through Steam now, apparently so I'll be giving that a go. Is Steam going to indicate the hours I spend "playing" Blender through Steam?

[Anonymous No.641009]

>>640945
>>640949

I can greentext, just forgot to add the symbol. It's a well known fact that idiots who run out of arguments resort to pointing grammar mistakes. This tells a lot about the blender fanbase.

[Anonymous No.641011]

>>641006
Installing-Blender-Through-Steam Guy, here. I forgot to say: thanks.

[Anonymous No.641012]

>>641008
>Is Steam going to indicate the hours I spend "playing" Blender through Steam?
I'm afraid so.

[Anonymous No.641023]

>>640606
Turn off the environmental lighting completely.

Make all of her textures shadeless so it gives off a proper PS1 style look to it.

[Anonymous No.641024]

>>641009
>shitposters getting this mad at software

[Anonymous No.641025]

I'm having an issue while trying to use quick smoke. The domain/flow settings reset themselves to default whenever I switch between the two (or to none/collision.) I've tried starting from scratch and using different objects as the source of the smoke but it happens every time.

[Anonymous No.641027]

>>641009
It's also a well known fact giving an idiot like you an argument is a waste of time, because you'll just keep peddling the same shit.

[Anonymous No.641034]

>>641025
just tried it on 2.79b. am not experiencing your problem.

maybe instead of using quick smoke, just do it from the physics tab

[Anonymous No.641041]

>>641034
Seems to be the same. I've tried using it on different objects, restarting the program, and even reinstalling now. Guess I'm just destined to be unable to use smoke.

[Anonymous No.641043]

>>641041
lol, what the hell. never seen that before.
you probably ticked something, did you reset to factory settings?

[Anonymous No.641062]

>>640961
Could have done worse for a first project.

[Anonymous No.641063]

>>640961
don't forget the coal

[Anonymous No.641089]

Anyone else have this issue before? A material showing up black in renders when they should have a different material/texture than what is being shown?

[Anonymous No.641090]

can somebody link me the sculpt toolkit addon? thanks.
>>641089
what does your node graph look like?

[Anonymous No.641108]

>>641090
Node layout you mean? Never saved the file, but it was just that shader (with texture). I'll see if I can replicate the result and share it, but it's usually just whatever shader node I'm using. And it always looks fine in the sidebar.

[Anonymous No.641110]

>>641108
your node editor

[Anonymous No.641112]

>>641110
That's what I meant. Gimme a bit to set my scene up again.

[Anonymous No.641117]

So I'm following the anvil normal baking tutorial and I keep having this on my low-poly anvil after I baked and plugged normal texture. Tried changing ray distance, scaling meshes so they would overlap differently - it's still there. HP mesh itself looks good, no visible artifacts or other fuckups. So what did I do wrong?

[Anonymous No.641118]

>>641117
there could be alot of reasons as to why it happens, but generally speaking i don't bake in blender, and if i do i bake in internal

[Anonymous No.641119]

>>641118
>and if i do i bake in internal
So did I. Think I'll just leave it as it is for now and move on. Not sure if that's the best idea though.

[Anonymous No.641123]

Is there really no way to join UV islands together? I've googled this repeatedly over the course of months every time it became relevant for numerous models and I still have never found a way to just join them together.

I have a mirrored model and I want to pack the islands without splitting up two identical UV islands because that wastes space.

[Anonymous No.641129]

>>641119
i generally don't follow andrew price tutorials. he spends alot of time teaching you nothing of value.
go with cg-geek or borncg instead, you will get a much faster grip with blender with those.

>>641123
in uv menu, click w for special menu and choose weld. but you have to do it manually for every vertex.
anyways you don't even want to weld them together because the color might slip into the the island next to it (unless they have similar texture)

[Anonymous No.641130]

>>641062
This is pretty good anon. Keep up the good work!

[Anonymous No.641134]

>>641129
>borncg
Do you unironically want to learn poor workflow techniques? Did you even watch his lego character video?

For Blender learning, it's CGCookie or bust.

[Anonymous No.641135]

>>641134
in parciular? i didn't follow the lego shit, but i did learn blender directly through his tutorial series, i watched like 10 videos or so and got up to speed.

cgcookie is more for people that want to turn pro or make high level stuff, but that's like 30 dollars a month

[Anonymous No.641140]

>>641135
>in parciular?
https://youtu.be/Wv-qsxHA9Ug?t=20m52s

https://youtu.be/mFJe0ayr82g?t=14m

Start from the timestamps in the links (it should be automatic). This is why you don't use the boolean modifier unless you know what you're doing.
The second one in particular turned out to be very destructive and he just left a shading error there, saying it wouldn't be noticeable.

[Anonymous No.641156]

Why does my mesh have these jagged lines?
I tried recalculating my normals but that didn't help.

[Anonymous No.641161]

>>640808
god that is one disgusting soulless chink, You did a good job if your aim was to be realistic.

[Anonymous No.641166]

>>641161
lol thanks. I'm working on a series of pron images with her. Soulless asian girls is my going to be my specialty.

[Anonymous No.641196]

How do I show a Material Output on the model in 3d view?

[Anonymous No.641200]

Any good Blender animation series? I figured it's time to learn something new again to become even a bigger jack of all trades.

I know Maya is the best for it, but I don't really want to download it again, so I might as well use Blender, at least for now.

[Anonymous No.641204]

>>641156
this image doesn't tell me anything
>>641200
try sardi pax, cg-geek,borncg etc.
as for blender itself, the animation tools are good but the UI might get confusing.
my advice is this: if you want to do simple animation (like object,mechanical) then its gonna be very easy. especially with the animation keyset for keying frames. the red button lets you automatically key things every time you change the position of the rig/object in the frame.
for IK, characters and faces. you will have to learn alot of shit like blend shapes,constraints,graph editor etc

[Anonymous No.641208]

>>641204
Okay, thanks. I was also looking at some CGcookie stuff. All of it honestly seems amateurish to me, but I guess it's good enough for beginners.

Yeah, I want to focus on character animation, at least to learn the basics so I can use them in a game. I'm experienced with Blender though, that's not the problem.

[Anonymous No.641209]

>>641208
As far as animation tutorials in Blender go, look for the Wayne Dixon courses on CG Cookie, not the beginner one by that british guy.

His stuff is as good as you will ever get for animation tutorials in Blender because he thoroughly explains everything. If you're a member, he critiques your exercises with a lot of detail too.

[Anonymous No.641212]

>>641062
Today's study, learning how to add texture.

[Anonymous No.641249]

hey there,
I started using blender few days back (coming over from SolidEdge/Catia/NX) and I am struggling to find any info or tools for aligning objects and faces or snapping them to points on curve and so on. Is there anything like that or do i have to eyeball it?

[Anonymous No.641252]

>>640575

[Anonymous No.641253]

>>641249
>coming over from SolidEdge/Catia/NX
>started using blender
Why? If you are trying to do CAD-type work, Blender (or any other artistic 3D DCC tool) if not the right tool.

You have snapping tools in Blender, but don't expect engineering-level precision from them. https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/dev/editors/3dview/object/editing/transform/control/snap.html

[Anonymous No.641261]

What is the easiest way to explode an assembly in blender?

[Anonymous No.641267]

>>641253
i need more artistic approach rather than engineering, thats why. Thanks

[Anonymous No.641274]

rate.

[Anonymous No.641276]

>>641274
0

[Anonymous No.641277]

>>641274
remainder that at that era of graphics, you didn't have skeleton rigs

[Anonymous No.641296]

>>641212
I think i made it worse.

[Anonymous No.641302]

>>641296
seems like you have trouble with fire, learn fire and come back

[Anonymous No.641303]

>>641274

[Anonymous No.641305]

>>641302
I couldnt light the smoke enough without everything else being extremely over lit.

[Anonymous No.641322]

>>641305
Time to try some compositing, then. Or render appropriately in HDR and then grade the result to compress the highlights and lift the shadows.

[Anonymous No.641343]

Is there really no way to bake procedural textures to a UV map?
Seems like that would save lots of processing power and allow the model to be exported with textures more easily.

[Anonymous No.641345]

>>641343
Just use the inbuilt baking functionality of your render engine of choice.

[Anonymous No.641355]

>>641303
>>641276
>>641277
finished.

[Anonymous No.641359]

>>641355
i think specular is not tasteful here.
specular is a rather new shader option for this period of time. if you look at ps1-ps2 games most of the early ones didn't have that at all. it was mostly diffuse. i think when resident evil 2 came out you had actual materials and colored lightning.
still, i have to point out that it looks good

[Anonymous No.641387]

Would it be a bad workflow to animate first and add textures later?

[Anonymous No.641388]

>>640918
>pening and closing viewports is challenging for no good reason

The fuck is a viewport and why would you want to close it.

>ut for some reason alot of the basic modeling functions are in the specials menu for no good reason. you have "push/pull,smooth vertex,randomize,noise and lot of crazy shit i never heard about. what if they replaced those with bevel,bridge and inset

WHY ARE YOU CLICKING ON THINGS IN THE MENU RATHER THAN USING THE RADIAL PIE MENU YOU DOUBLE, TRIPLE DECKER CHEESE BURGER

[Anonymous No.641393]

>>641388
There's a radial menu?

[Anonymous No.641396]

>>641355
her head's not big enough.

>>641388
Zip zopp puddin' pop!

[Anonymous No.641398]

>>641387
I don't think there is any downside to doing it that way. I think the only benefit of doing textures first is just to make sure the model looks nice fully modeled and textured before going into the animation.

[Anonymous No.641424]

>>641388
>WHY ARE YOU CLICKING ON THINGS IN THE MENU RATHER THAN USING THE RADIAL PIE MENU YOU DOUBLE, TRIPLE DECKER CHEESE BURGER
Ok, I'm not that guy, and I used blender for quite a while before switching over to maya for good recently, and I gotta say, it's opinions like these that really set blender back, in my humble opinion.

Hotkeys are fine, and I enjoy the fact that I can rebind everything under the sun if I'm using blender, but the job of a menu is to cleanly guide someone to an option they might not know about / know the hotkey for, and blender's UI simply does not do that job well. Hotkeys are all well and good, but how many people do you think would use my super k00l 3d program if all it came with was a long list of commands and their respective hotkeys, and no menus or UI to speak of?

Maya's UI has a lot wrong with it as well, but it's just better at communicating with the user, and you must understand that the pie menu is still hidden under an addon, so many new people won't really even know of it in the first place.

In short, I switched to maya because I simply do not believe in open source, free programs. I believe blender would be much MUCH better if they charged (maybe 100$ or 30$ with each update costing the same), and got together an actual company with actual leadership and direction. Open source, community driven software is a beautiful dream and all, but the more I grow up, the less I like free stuff, because "free" is just not a reliable business model, and passion only goes so far, when we're talking about massive software suits whose design needs to be consistent and under a single view.

Tl;dr: communism is bad, mkay?

[Anonymous No.641437]

>>641424
blender employees are getting paid just like any other employee, otherwise we wouldn't have any remotely capable version of the program.

also i agree with you on this one. it seems like blender is suffering from the same thing GIMP suffers from, which is bad software design.
they made the tools really good, but they are hidden under a garbage pile of menu's. half of the buttons in the modeling panel are useless, i made over 20 projects this year and i haven't used them at all.
also texture view, very confusing thing to have. a mode that tricks alot of users and gives nothing in return.
ill save the rant on the baker and normal editor, that's for another time.
i think 99% of blender users only use 50% of the software features, so at least make those accessible

[Anonymous No.641447]

>>641437
An anecdote for ya:
So I spend quite a bit of time just tinkering around in Blender and attempting to explore all its options (I really do think everyone should spend some time just traversing all the nooks and crannies of every program). I joined a Blender Discord server recently, and I'd occasionally share about the funny little things I've found that Blender can do. It always catches the others off-guard, even those that've been using Blender for way longer than I have. Without fail, I'll get a few people going "oh wow, didn't know that".
And overall, yeah, I agree with a lot of things you and >>641424 have said. Blender's one confusing mess. I still find new options I've never heard of every then and again, by pressing random buttons or searching deep in the W/spacebar menus. Though, most of these options are more "specialised", so to say, and you can accomplish most if not all with the regular tools already on display (with a few hotkey-only ones as well).

>I believe blender would be much MUCH better if they charged
Definitely. Perhaps this could be an unfair comparison given that it has 10 years ahead of Blender, but I like to think of Houdini as Blender if it were being well-funded. Ultimately they are the same program (cough), attempting to accomplish everything in the standard 3D workflow, but one's light-years ahead of the other. However, I wouldn't really say that these open-source software are entire fallacies though. If the passion keeps up, they honestly just progress at a (much) slower rate compared to their funded peers. And it's not like Blender isn't closing the gap with the industry dogs either, perhaps they'll always be a step behind but the rate of progress has been steadily increasing.

[Anonymous No.641451]

>>641447
>Ultimately they are the same program (cough),
>Houdini
>Blender
You seemed like a reasonable person until that point. At that point, you became just another Blendlet in my view.

[Anonymous No.641476]

>Box modeling low poly human
>Starting from the ground
>Extrude and scale up to the hip joint

What now? Do I rotate the loop and scale or do I use knife/boolean? When viewed from the top, the former is a rectangle while the later is a square.

[Anonymous No.641481]

>>641451
>can't read the (cough) implying a hyperbole
Language devices, my dude. Learn to detect them. Even then, did you not read further than that? I clearly stated that they had very distinct differences.

[Anonymous No.641484]

>>640281
Nvidia is better for Blender than AMD because of CUDA cores. The 1060 is worth the extra cost.

[Anonymous No.641485]

>>641484
Thanks. I decided to go for the GTX 1060 6GB and it arrived 2 days ago. Can't wait to see the results once the build is up and running. :)

[Anonymous No.641487]

Does anyone know of any good workflow videos about character UV unwrapping?

[Anonymous No.641489]

Kinda just started learning how to sculpt. I'm coming to this after only box-modeling shitty anime models.

[Anonymous No.641490]

Is distributed network rendering supported on Cycles yet?

[Anonymous No.641498]

>>641476
cgcookie.com

[Anonymous No.641499]

>>639653
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZnUgt659oI&t=251s

Just started using it and I want to kms.

I'm trying to extend a shape just like this tutorial but I its not working.

I know its not because the cursor is green but I dont know what that means

[Anonymous No.641506]

>>641447
whats really fucked me up is that so many good options are under no menu at all.
gotta really know your 3D and use the spacebar if needed
>>641476
should have started with mirror modifier, when you have 2 sides you can adjust the pussy area

[Anonymous No.641507]

>>641487
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-ZmDKuB6HI
>>641490
is it (if i think i know what you mean) but it went down (was available ages ago)

[Anonymous No.641508]

>>641490
>distributed network rendering
https://www.crowd-render.com/ ?

[Anonymous No.641510]

>>641499
just set the brush to grab with dynatopo on.
i don't know why this nigga used separate meshes and then joined them

[Anonymous No.641516]

How would I port or convert the basic functionality of a 3dsmax BIPED to blender?

I assume id first export the mesh then rig it in blender with IK chains but how would you get that thing where you bend the spine but the head and arms stay pointing level? Like in max you can bend the spine backwards and the head is still oriented forwards and will only change if you select and rotate the head.

[Anonymous No.641525]

>>641516
disable "inherit rotation" on the head bone

[Anonymous No.641586]

>>641261
anyone?

[Anonymous No.641596]

>>641506

I have difficulty keeping track of things in a cluttered screen and something moving around on it's own both distracts and annoys. What's wrong with flipping a copy on the x axis, connecting the legs with a face and extruding?

>>641498

You sure? This looks damn awful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8qbY70F8po

[Anonymous No.641602]

>>641596
>You sure? This looks damn awful.
You're not trying to re-create the exact model they're making. You're learning their workflow so that you might apply it to making your own model.
The topology in that video is fine, and allows for easily adjusting into something that looks good.

[Anonymous No.641603]

>>641602
To add on to this, you shouldn't be modeling organic forms yet if you don't understand topology. Also, Sculpting and re-topology completely blows box-modeling out of the water when it comes to organic forms. Something to keep in mind.

[Anonymous No.641605]

>>641603
Not that guy.
Is there a form of modeling where I just define curves in space that intersect each other?
I think it'd be really simple and easy to just apply morphs to primitives that intersect each other, treat the entire collage of meshes as a single mesh and then draw topological curves on it.

[Anonymous No.641608]

How can I make the noise texture node make slightly vertically blurred (like as you can in PS with noise and applying vertical motion blur)?

[Anonymous No.641614]

>>641605
You mean like modeling stuff with the skin modifier?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0ySG59xkys

>>641608
Bake the texture, then apply motion blur to it in PS.

[Anonymous No.641615]

>>641614
>Bake the texture
some guys are into procedural materials

[Anonymous No.641616]

>>641608
https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/67779/how-to-smooth-or-blur-a-procedural-texture
Could probably distort the texture on your desired axis by having a Mapping node scaled appropriately before the modifying noise texture.

[Anonymous No.641619]

>>641605
>where I just define curves in space that intersect each other
NURBS modeling. Most probably, a nightmare for character creation.

[Anonymous No.641627]

>>641614
>>641619
Definitely not skin modifier, closer to NURBS

What I have in mind is essentially drawing curves by tracing on top of an existing mesh, effectively retopologizing it using the new curves.

The existing mesh would be made up of primitives deformed by basic operations, like scale, lattice transformations, Boolean operations--that kind of thing.

I figured this would lend itself fairly well for character creation, because the focus of the technique is to get the correct topological curves into the right neighborhood. Adjustments for anatomical accuracy can still be made as necessary, but if you apply your primitives correctly and think ahead, you should never have to modify the topology--it should just be perfect from the beginning.

[Anonymous No.641630]

>>641608
with the compositor.
i don't know exactly how, but i managed to apply vignatte using the compositior alone, im sure you can blur your stuff since there is literally a blur node in the compositor

[Anonymous No.641631]

>>641627
i think the closest thing is either bolean union or dynamesh (also exist in dynatopo, but i don't know how) it creates awful lot of excess geometry tho

[Anonymous No.641632]

>>641627
You can have multiple submeshes in a single mesh object in Blender.
You can join multiple intersecting meshes into a single mesh using boolean union in Blender (you can use BoolTool addon to do this in one click for any number of selected meshes). However, self-intersections and multiple overlapping intersections do not work properly with booleans. 3D-Coat and ZBrush can do it though.
You can retopologize in Blender by drawing polygons and guide lines on existing meshes using the Retopoflow addon. The meshes don't have to connected. You can also use Bsurfaces with Grease Pencil.

You can retopologize single meshes automatically for free using the Instant Meshes software/algorithms, which allows for edge flow and pole vertices to be manipulated by the user. But it does not join or "bridge" intersecting meshes.
Modo and 3D-Coat implement the Instant Meshes algorithm. Z-Brush and 3D-Coat also have their own retopology algorithms.

Another thing that sounds similar to what you are asking is Metaballs in Blender. These are parametrically defined primitives that can intersect arbitrarily to then combine them into a single polygon mesh.

[Anonymous No.641642]

>>641627
>What I have in mind is essentially drawing curves by tracing on top of an existing mesh, effectively retopologizing it using the new curves.
This made me think of what's shown in this video past 11:10: https://vimeo.com/228351741 Is that kinda what you have in mind?

[Anonymous No.641643]

Trying to make a glazed ceramic texture for a future mug project just using a shit model from Sketchfab

How can i improve it?

[Anonymous No.641650]

>>641643
Finger prints are out of proportion, also they are too intense IMO. They look like finger prints on a giant chocolate mug.

[Anonymous No.641666]

Does anyone know how to make a "reduce brush" for the sculpt mode?
I want it to be ready on a hotkey and the dyntopo reduce amount should be depending on the strength setting of the brush.
The relative detail stuff doesn't really work well, hence I want to make a reduce brush.

[Anonymous No.641667]

>>641666
constant detail works better

[Anonymous No.641676]

I'm making a simple animation and I want the text to appear at a frame, how would I do that?

[Anonymous No.641678]

>>641676
i think this helps

https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/5113/how-to-make-one-object-gradually-disappear-as-it-passes-through-another-object

there is another solution but it involves drivers and python

[Anonymous No.641679]

Why can't I simply select several items and set the material for them at once, like you know, in every other program?
WHY do I have to do it to every single object even if it's the same fucking material?

>inb4 you don't need that one click trick if it's so easy to go through the following hoops!

[Anonymous No.641680]

>>641679
ctrl+l > materials

[Anonymous No.641691]

>>641643
This fucking triggers me, I want to clean that mug

[Anonymous No.641714]

>>641691
My dumb monkey brain reached for my screen to clean it at least 3 times while working on it.

[Anonymous No.641717]

>>641714

Isn't it funny when you're so used to touch screens that you start to reach and touch a conventional screen?

[Anonymous No.641719]

This film was pretty good. Lots of Cycles noise in dark scenes and out of focus objects but nothing too distracting.

>>641490
If you want to roll your own you'll have a bit of work to do. Hope you're comfortable with GNU/Linux.
https://www.flamenco.io/
https://www.blendernation.com/2017/08/16/blender-gnu-parallel/

[Anonymous No.641754]

>>641719
what film is that? if its old they probably didn't have denois

[Anonymous No.641794]

Might be a retarded question but I am a newfag that sucks cocks and want to know. Why the fuck does everyone hate Blender so much on this board? Even if you are building a portfolio, do these niggers seriously expect you to either be a member of the secret club in order to get Autodesk shit for free, or am I supposed to believe this isn't a hobby for poorfags? (lol)

Your 2D sister board is hideously autistic about several things, but not software. So why the fuck do people hate donuts so fucking much here? Thanks.

[Anonymous No.641797]

>>641794
same reason, autism. 4chan always have those brand wars, same with /mu/ /v/ and /o/ etc.

some of the complaints against blender are justified, but its probably the best open source software on the planet (even if it falls short compared to more specialized packages)

webm related, this is how the average shitposter on /3/ looks like

[Anonymous No.641798]

>>641797
>some of the complaints against blender are justified
Such as?

[Anonymous No.641799]

>>641798
the UI could have been much better, especially the buttons.
some people want to do laid back modeling and blender is bad at giving you that, you need 2 hands on keyboard to use hotkeys for everything, but its faster.
also the bake tool, the normal editor are bad to none unusable. but no one uses them anyway

[Anonymous No.641800]

>>641794
Welcome to 4chan.

[Anonymous No.641801]

>>641794
Don't fucking bother coming to this place if you're looking to get good at this. Leave now before it's too late.

[Anonymous No.641812]

>>641754
Next Gen, it came out a few days ago. Yeah probably, they'll have a talk at bcon so hopefully they'll share a lot of details about it.

[Anonymous No.641814]

>>641794
Because everyone admits GIMP sucks compared to Photoshop.

[Anonymous No.641815]

>>641814
Why, in the first place, has a cult developed around Blender? No other free software community reaches such a level of blind fandom.

[Anonymous No.641816]

>>641815

cockos Reaper

[Anonymous No.641817]

>>641794
Freetards are hilariously easy to bait, especially after 2016.
Lots of people have also had bad experiences with Blender, especially when it was newer.
To beginners, UI is everything.
Doesn't matter if you "can" if you "can" also just get an "educational copy" of something that looks easier to use.

[Anonymous No.641818]

>>641815
Blender's claim to fame, is that unlike most other large (in terms of codebase) FOSS projects, Blender is actually capable of doing similar things compared to commercial software packages; at the core of a 3D modeling package, you are just pushing verts, and that is an exceedingly simple thing to be able to claim to do.

GIMP devs are also highly autistic and insist that it is only designed to edit photos (literally no one uses it for this).
Krita is significantly better in this regard but also much less stable and ironically less feature rich despite being quite usable.

[Anonymous No.641819]

>>641818
Krita has a ton of features that are not in Photoshop or any other software for that matter
Just considering all the different brush engines it has, all the blending modes etc.
What other software lets you handpaint normal maps with pen tilt and live preview a phong shading
none

[Anonymous No.641829]

>>639653
How the fuck do I model this? I feel retarded. I mainly just can't get a circular interior without causing a fuck ton of mesh issues.

[Anonymous No.641831]

>>641829
Model the details on a flat plane, 360° array it to create a ring.

[Anonymous No.641832]

>>641831
And after that apply the array modifier, select the inner "ring" and use looptools > circle

[Anonymous No.641835]

>>641832
Absolutely beautiful anon cheers

[Anonymous No.641836]

>>641835
For reference this is the before. I've tried shrink wrap modifier, boolean, and exporting it to an stl and using tinkercad to cut a hole in it which almost worked but one small bit of it was fucked up.

[Anonymous No.641845]

>>641829
>>641835
>>641836

You mean like this?

[Anonymous No.641847]

>>641845
For the record, I made a plane, then cut out the pattern and extruded it. I added an array modifyer, then I used proportional editing (2d projection, sphere) to make the inner face rounded. When it looked good, I applied the modifier and bridged the edge loops.

I'm new to modelling, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was an even easier way, but it didn't really take long once I figured it out.

[Anonymous No.641850]

>>641845
>>641836
>>641847
>>641829
There are many ways to do it. That's the beauty of 3D!

When you have the initial "piece" of the ring, you can use the warp tool (hidden away in Mesh->Transform) to bend 45° around the 3D cursor, then flatten the outer face (preserving the angle). Your view angle matters for this tool.

You can use the Simple Deform modifier -> Bend to do the same thing, then flatten the outer face (preserving the angle)

The reason I don't bend only the inner face with these methods is that this will not give the correct angle at the connecting face.

If you have a ring of square pieces, you can make the inner vertices a circle by considering that a circle is characterized by the fact that every vertex has the same distance to a given point. Therefore you can scale all these vertices down to their common center, then use the Push/Pull tool to move them back away from this center by an absolute amount. (Push/Pull is like scale but moving the same absolute distance for everything)

[Anonymous No.641851]

>>641850
Also you can just use a boolean with a cylinder on the ring
but it could give you aids topology if you are not careful

[Anonymous No.641853]

>>641836
Shrinkwrap onto a cylinder works too, great idea. Why did it not work for you

[Anonymous No.641857]

Another way would be to start with a simple circle, select all vertices, checker deselect every n-th, then extrude and scale to get the outer face, fill and delete the face, extrude everything to get volume. This gives you n-gons

[Anonymous No.641869]

Noticed you guys have reached bump, here's a new thread: >>641868
Ciao.

[Anonymous No.641904]

>>641869
This board is slow as shit, you're retarded.
Ciao.

[Anonymous No.643178]

Any tips for tentacle topology, so it bends nicely in all directions? No lewd stuff it's more like chaos spawn tentacles.

[Anonymous No.644070]

First real character that looks human.

R8