I am really interested in the Viewport rendering and how the Blender Internal is going to be replaced. I do not see much discussion of this, yet it is very important to all of the animation, illustration, anime, arch-viz where non-photo realistic renders in faster time frames make a world of difference in production. I also want to hear of any developments on Freestyle as there were NO! changes in the 2.78 release. This needs to be addressed, particularly in regards to the Cycles work, (non-Freestyle friendly) so that it can work more interactively with Viewport rendering. Perhaps cache the Map from the Viewport render and allow us to then tweak the parameters of the line qualities, in Real Time, using the Cache. This would put Blender in the foreground for these related 2D/3D visualization fields. I hope someone it listening and can give a response, as I have not been able to get much clarity on the full implications of the demise of the Blender Internal and what will fully replace it?? Anybody??
Hello, blender devs!
It will be nice to have /usr/src/blender as /usr/src/blender-2.8 and /usr/share/blender as /usr/share/blender-2.8 for installing on linux with stable version of blender for mutch more testing
Thank you for this great software!
While that may be so, it’s gotten to the point where it’s become a little murky as to what thread to use for new developments (do we continue with the 2.7x development thread or not). That being especially with no guarantee that a 2.79 will even exist.
Guaranteed - Viewport upgrade (openGL 3.2), New depsgraph, new asset management
Questions - Everything nodes, unified physics? (Lukas mentioned in the IRC the other day he might leave Blender development, who will take up his work?) What makes me happy to see is some new developers in Physics lately (Alexander Gavrilov, Luca Rood)
Other unlcear areas - GE replaced by “interactive mode”? Apparently both compositor and sequencer are up for rewrites? Who´s going to do thaT?
I think things will get cleare after the Blender conference, especially once we know which developers will fill up the spots recently made available through Ton´s deals with AMD and diferent studios…
Hopefully, this means massive performance improvements in every mode (including editmode) as well as major improvements in the responsiveness of operations when modifiers are active (because there’s still a number of massive bottlenecks in the drawing code yet).
Also on the developer site, there’s been a massive number of interface design tasks that have been dredged up from the backlog to look at for 2.8 (and indeed, interface improvements and usability tweaks are already starting to come in).
Refactoring code doesnt change functionality.
Its a job of restructering and improving code readability.
So it can more easily be read and maintained, and adjusted in the future.
Codes and classes might change, values might be renamed etc.
But essentially the main API’s stay the same.
(The process of turning spagheti into someting with a pattern.)
Its after such restructering that code can be better improved
BTW Ace i read you now build your blender version, your building on windows or building on linux ?.
All nodes in particles/physics gives me something to fear. Nodes means that you have to know in advance how to do what you want to achieve. With no nodes system you can do tests while you’re changing values. In addition you have all possible values in a single panel.
Well, at least is the difficulty I noticed with materials trying to learn Cycles coming from internal.
Another example, my attempt to try to learn Animation Nodes Addon has totally been a failure. It is extremely difficult for me.
And when you understood what is the purpose of each node through examples, you succeeded to do what you want with Cycles.
I suggest you to try animation nodes addon videos. You can fear this problem for nodes that you have no idea how to connect them.
But after looking at some tutorials, you will loose this fear quickly and do your own stuff.
Fundamentaly, nodes will only expose concepts that you are already familiar with. (location, rotation, scale, polygons, normals, etc…)
You have access to same data that a modifier uses but there is no more the frame of modifier.
Your nodetree is your modifier.
You will have a force field nodegroup instead of panels and sliders.
But you probably could use an empty’s Z orientation as a force vector and use a math node as a strength parameter.
If you have understand what output sockets can be connected to what input sockets, you can start to experiment.
Using nodes will not remove the step to increase or decrease a value to find the correct one for your set-up.
And with a little bit of practice, you will appreciate to see all your physic simulation in own nodetree instead of having it dispersed into several objects properties tabs.
You are building a modification of your geometry with nodes. It looks a step further than adding a modifier.
But in facts, it corresponds to what you are doing when you add more than one modifier or use several mesh edit operators in edit mode.
It can’t be an instant intuitive process. You have to acquire knowledge about each node the same way that you had to learn what was doing each modifier and each operator.
@zeauro, I really tried to learn Animation Nodes, looks like something designed for engineers, not for artists.
Even with Cycles I still use only basic node setup, I thank the existence of addons like Material Library VX with premade materials, PBR Materials addon, and also I hope for the Disney shader development success.
I’m just saying that nodes are not for me. I’m not saying that Blender should not become all nodes. If everyone sees advantages in it, so be it
So, you will have to wait physics nodetrees presets addons.
Animation nodes use loops/subprograms nodes that is more a computer programmer domain for procedural animations.
You are not an artist using whatever tool.
Anyways, with current interface, physics are also a specific topic with appropriate scientific barbaric terms : velocity, mass, friction, permeability, absorption, newtonain, brownian, Euler, Runge-Kutta, vorticity, viscosity, charge, Lennard-Jones …
Don’t be afraid by some Vectors, Float, Integer, Matrix nodes.
Examples will be provided. At least to prove that 2.8 nodes stuff is useable.
At its early state, It will not contain as many nodes as Houdini.
@yafu, i tried to learn the animation nodes as well, your right it is not easy.
Kinda gave up on it as well, though it wouldnt mean that if in the future new options get in (hair particles),
Then i would certainly give it another try.
Animation nodes where a concept idea, but i think it might be something nice.
Maybe at some point muscles would be easy with it
It will allow for a bit more freedom as compared to the default gui stuff we find now in particles.
Before there’s a chance for out-of-control speculation to start, let’s wait and see what he has to say in his own words first (noting that the statement gives no confirmation that he will leave development).