blender vs. commercial decimator


(Modron) #1

i pitted blenders decimator against a commercial one that claims to be the best, and blender kicked it’s ass. :stuck_out_tongue:


(piterx) #2

blenderfull…


(karpov) #3

Are you sure ?

Once I saw someone using cinema 4D decimator : it was just perfect.
(for architectural modeling)

e.g. : import a house model with polygones everywere, run cinema 4D decimator…and that’s it, eges fit exactly the project shapes, so you can move walls, columns very easily.

Is that possible with blender ?


(Modron) #4

to a point blender will maintain some degree of integrity to the model, so, edges that are well defined will usually remain so unless you are decimating to some ridiculously low ammount of polys. i never tried the one you mentioned, so it might be really good. however if you haven’t tried blenders decimator recently, then you should put them up against each other, because I think some of the code for that was just recently updated to make it more efficient.


(toontje) #5

I think the decimator needs a friend: Anistropic remeshing.

http://www.loria.fr/~levy/php/article.php?pub=../publications/papers/2003/anisotropic


(Extrudeface) #6

I liked vizup

It has got back again freeware.

Only supports vrml, but saved me many times long ago.

oops

not available anymore. It’s said is freeware but 2.x is comercial and they don’t put any link to download the free one. Which is logical. Anyway, i have it. In case anyone interested can upload to one of those 14 days temp file vaults. Dunno, haven’t used Blender’s edcimator ever. Usually I reduce by other ways and I mainly model in Wings.

I know in Max the plugin called Poly cruncher have some serious fans.

There’s Metasequoia’s modelling tool (as a feature) , and that free standalone thing (source code available!) called qslim. Non compiled is 2.x, and compiled old one.

2.x
http://graphics.cs.uiuc.edu/~garland/software/qslim.html

1.x
http://graphics.cs.uiuc.edu/~garland/software/qslim10.html

I think I tried it and liked a lot, specially the command line tool options…(is msdos stuff)

Oh, and this one, I never tried it, is free too, looks good , is as a tool of a free game engine, but seems is usable for any mesh:
http://devnet.sylphis3d.com/node/21


(Extrudeface) #7

hey, good luck.

Seems the story is -probably- like this :

The version they had for sometime was freeware, then become shareware non crippled, then got back in 1.8 version as freeware, and seems1.8 will be freeware forever. They added uber useful stuff in2.x, anyway, like reduction per areas.I can do this just painting with a brush in amorphium1, but I like more how this one reduces, personally.

So, good luck as seems is at a bunch of freeware depots. I recommend as allways grab it, (as well as qslim, and the sylphis optimizer, they’re all good.)

http://www.freedownloadscenter.com/Multimedia_and_Graphics/Video_and_Animation_Tools/VizUp.html


(Trident) #8

Judging by the abstract it is one of those things that should be invented and implemented years ago, - basic idea is very sound.


(brecht) #9

Judging by the abstract it is one of those things that should be invented and implemented years ago, - basic idea is very sound.[/quote]
Eh, not really. This paper builds on years of research before it. But the results are impressive. There is a serious limitation to this method: it only works for meshes that you can map to the plane (they actually use LSCM for the mapping). The hand looks nice, but the more complex models in the paper don’t look very artist created at all.

I think the “Periodic Global Parametrization” method is even more promising:
http://www.loria.fr/~levy/php/article.php?pub=../publications/papers/2005/PGP
Or this one:
http://graphics.cs.uiuc.edu/~kircher/publications.html


(LetterRip) #10

I’d be interested in comparsions with the results achieved by cams decimator script which gives really good results.

LetterRip


(Trident) #11

Of course. But that idea of using minimal/maximal curvature isolines is still so natural that I couldn’t help… :slight_smile:

Yes, but OTOH it could re-use pre-existing UV (if I understood the paper correctly. Didn’t such an advanced math in years…). It is rather serious limitation nonetheless.

Yes, but they still look quite good.

Yes, looks very impressive, but not too “humanlike” either, more like result of splines->poly conversion. :slight_smile:


(Briggs) #12

If I recall correctly some decimation programs try to preserve UVs and other such information, something blender dosnt do. If the program your talking about has this feature, did you take this into account with your comparisons?

Cheers,
Xarf


(JA-forreal) #13

I was thinking along those lines also… But who knows what will happen as far as Blenders future development in this area. Blender is already good and it can only get better.


(Modron) #14

i didn’t check to see if it preserved UVs. It may have. I was going strictly on the poly / preservation of detail ratio.


(Extrudeface) #15

Vizup 1.8 freeware not only keeps (imho quite well the mesh shapes, probably Blender decimator is better in that, dunno, as never used it more than once a long, long time ago with a old Blender version, didn’t like it too much so never used again as had other options.Now surely it’s really good ) UVs, but also textures (tested right now with an installed 1.8) .And have read in a freeware depot review that also allows per area reducing (huh? thought was in the comercial only…also see some improves from last version I had)

I put u all a working freeware depot download, there bellow, as the one above requires to install one of those programs as downloaders, a no way to go… This one works great :

http://www.aplusfreeware.com/categories/mmedia/VizUp.html

As u see, it allows very easily to do LODs, several levels of compelxity witha button and instant preview.
Imho it really keeps the look of the original model.
Exports as vrml, but tested in my converters and viewers that keeps perfect once exported. that besides perhaps Blender’s wrl imported may respect all the info while import. If not, use any of the several converters or modelers for this.

I can only highly recommend it for any poly reduction. Though I love reducing manually.But for quick task, this rocks.

is windows only, have never tested if does give some problem in Wine, but look as is opengl based…so, probably works well there.

edit: the comercial versions (but 1.8 freeware does all what i personally need) do cost 299 and 1.495 $. Depending on version. So, it must be good… I guess. Of course, those are much better than the freeware.

edit 2: Ouch. See now. Blender wont import DIRECTLY from it for a reason. Is vrml2.0 . BTW, I remember there was vrml2.0 quite good plugin for Blender 2.35 , dunno if works with 2.40 alpha or the latest oficial 2.37.

edit3: u could use Accutrans at micromouse.ca , which while not free, is non crippled in anyway, andpretty good for testing this, surely. Is non time limited either. A great cheap 20$ converter, imho.

Second or first option: install a 2.25 Blender, (Modron pointed to that in a thread) import the vrml2 file, export as blend file. Open in other Blender.

Other is use 3d exploration or othe rconverter or modeler out there.

Bad luck this: http://blender.kimballsoftware.com/ is an exporter, not an importer.The fact is he made an importer for Ultimate Unwrap, but not for Blender : http://unwrap3d.kimballsoftware.com/