BMesh Preview #1

Most of the models I’ve seen using n-gons have messy topology. It’s especially bad with people new to modelling. I guess experience will vary as with most things. But on the other hand I have done house modelling in the past and I did find it to be more work without n-gons so it’s just a case of which is the least problematic.

You can sort of choose not to use them in a way so that would favor n-gons but in Maya, I’ve found on occasions that I’ve meant to use a quad and there was a hidden edge somewhere and it generated an n-gon, which caused strange artifacts. Blender would have given me an error saying it couldn’t make the face. That occurance is rare of course so for the added efficiency at certain types of modelling, it should be fine.

My main objection to them has really arisen from maya’s modelling. For example, trying to delete edges and faces, it throws up so many errors. Blender is so easy to work with. That was likely just Maya’s implementation rather than n-gons themselves - the video shows that it should be just as easy as Blender is now.

BTW, how does face loop and edge loop selection/adding/removing work with an n-gon?

Also, am I the only one who still misses the edge/face loop selection line? We used to have a blue line or something that would highlight the loops as you dragged over the mesh. I found that really useful as you could see at a glance what you were about to select and it also gave you an idea about how your loops were.

That is true but there are times when choices made by developers force more efficient and generally better workflows. One example is having Blender’s hotkeys hardcoded. To someone who prefers different hotkeys, it can be a pain but the advantages are that people remember them and everyone knows the same set.

Indeed, that example looks very nice.

OMG, Briggs are you Zarf? You have his old avatar on your site.

This looks really cool! Thanks for all your hard work Briggs! :smiley:

Support of N-gons dont make a messy model per se. Also…I would like one app mentioned that is limited to quads/triangles for modeling (not silly app tests, actual production application).

Max started out tri/quad centric. It had a structure similar (on outside at least) to one blender still uses. A tri/quad struct with possibility of hidden edges…that reappear on certain operations. This was upgraded very fast to a n-gon supporting struct.

Cinema 4d followed the same story.

Lightwave had a better structure from start (n-gon support) but had transition period with subdivision surfaces (i think it was custom subdivision scheme that was limited to quads/tri).

A lot of modeling time can be saved with n-gons. And you can always make quads of them…

Mmmm, BMesh! I’m looking forward to many new projects/features in Blender, but this is #1

What’s with the skeptic comments about NGons every time it’s brought up? For me, it is a solution for better modeling workflow (organic, architectural, whatever). If you get messy meshes, it’s not because of NGons…

My main objection to them has really arisen from maya’s modelling. For example, trying to delete edges and faces, it throws up so many errors. Blender is so easy to work with. That was likely just Maya’s implementation rather than n-gons themselves - the video shows that it should be just as easy as Blender is now.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I have used Maya from version 3-7, and never had problems with its NGons implementation. After so many years now, I’m still not comfortable with Blenders way of modeling (to much “vertex-pushing”), and that’s why BMesh is on the top of my list. I know quite a few pro modelers, and when I tell them that Blender currently lacks NGons, they laugh and dismiss it right then and there. This is important work, and thank you Briggs, for doing it!

Indeed he is.


Hmm, will this be on by default then? It will certainly make editing meshes easier. The amount of times that one wants to add a vertex onto an edge as part of the work flow, only to have 3 triangles forming in the adjacent quad…

Hmm, I used it from 3.5-8.5 and I’ve always had problems. You’re telling me you’ve never had an error saying you can’t delete a face due to a complex edge attachment? Not only that, just deleting faces/edges in general, you have to use the menu items to remove them as the delete key won’t always do it.

Yeah there’s more work in some cases - I haven’t found it to be excessively more but it depends on the model. I’ve actually found myself exporting Maya models to Blender to clean up and then take the back into Maya.

Tell them they’re not hardcore enough. Can’t use tumbleball mode, you’re not hardcore enough. :wink:

Cool, I keep wishing some people would come back and post more and some of them are here in disguise.

Well, it’s true that just deleting an edge (with del key or backspace) can bring problems, because it doesn’t delete the vertices. Faces, not so much of a problem. When I was made aware of this problem in Maya, I have always used the “delete edge” in “edit polygons” since. And when shift+rightclick menus appeared (in 6.5 bonustools) - which I think is the best, and most workflow enhancing feature! - I’d just shift+rightclick and drag down to the left = edge deleted properly.
Else I can’t remember any serious problems with polymodeling/NGons in Maya, besides all the node-cleaning you had to do in the Hypergraph, when using MJPolyTools… :slight_smile:

Anyway, been focusing exclusively on Blender for the past 10 months, and it’s still the modeling workflow from Maya I miss the most. BMesh can help remedy that, for me.

to each their own…

Is there any new development? First build crashes quite a lot. I hope that this will bring real modelling flexibility (face and edges cutting, more advance knife tool, etc.) and Blender modelling will be finally as good as for example Wings 3D.

Thanks for showing those images, Briggs. It appears that poles, which we currently have to painstakingly place by hand to get organic edgeflow correct, will be placed automatically by BMesh. Wow. Talk about a timesaver.

Yes. Not all of it in SVN though.

Crashes you should probably let me know about otherwise I might not know they exist since it seems pretty stable on my systems atm…


I can’t see the vid as it is blocked at work. Not trying to be a ludite, but is it possible to turn the N-Gons off, or to specifiy that you want your model in tris? I’m only asking this as I do some game modeling and you have to have your model in tris for that. It would be very bad news to have problems exporting a 3000k monster and find that an n-gon had insinuated itself somewhere in mesh.

On the flip side, will this smooth out the old problems of having to hunt down and eradicate tris from sub-surfed meshes?

I’ve got to say thank you for all the work that yourself and others have done to make Blender’s next release an Earth-shaking event.

Oh, and cool avatar :yes:

As I know Wings has also possibility to highlight tris, quads, fives, …

I’m drooling with anticipation. :smiley:

I recently looked through the development forums and saw that a few years ago the development of Doo-Sabin subdivision was cancelled because of the lack of support for N-Gons. Anybody know if this is back in any developer’s mind?

I don’t see a reason why we should have an on/off button for N-gons. If you don’t what model with ngons just simple don’t create ngons. And if you create a Ngon by mistake that you don’t is aware of, I’m sure there will by a script to analyze your mesh and see if it’s 100% ngon free. Just like there are scripts to locate and cleanup vertices that are not connected to an edge or edges that are not connected to a polygon.

On the flip side, will this smooth out the old problems of having to hunt down and eradicate tris from sub-surfed meshes?

The catmull-clark algorithm used in the sub-surf modifier always creates 100% quads, whether your original mesh have triangles, ngons or only quads. And the statement that your original mesh should be 100% quad or else sub-surfed mesh will be f***ed up is just a big myth. …yes ngons and triangels used in the wrong place could create bad sub-surfed mesh, but that could also quads do, believe it or not! It’s just a matter of knowing when and how to use them (…I should write a tutorial about this when I find the time :wink:

I absolutely agree with Gustav G. Modeler should always know what he/she is modelling, including proper usage or placement of n-gons (or even) trises. Some wishes in the forum to be able to turn n-gons possibility on or off scare me. The only good attitude and solution is to introduce tools (scripted or hardcoded) to analyse the mesh and detect tris, quads, ngons, unconnected vertice or edge etc.

I find it kinda silly to even discuss those questions.
I think every tool has it’s purpose.

The more Blender is equipped, the bedder.

I was just testing the current Amapi 7.5 engine and noticed how damn good their
Dynamic Construction tree is, their possebility to use polygon to create a NURBS object inside and even use TRIM tools on the NURBS object which is based on the low polygon model.

Their boolean tools are till today a damn dream and the same goes for the edge bevel tools.

No N-Gon, or N-Gon sounds like we do not need a boolean and bevel tools because we should model it by hand to prevent messy mesh we micht have to clean up when using and automated cutting tool. mh …

BTW amapi was quite great years ago, and man after using it nearly 6 years later again, I noticed how damn fluid and fast Blender works for modeling.

I think that good booleans and bevel functions may have much in common with proper ngons implementation (my experience from Maya).

Concerning NURBS I hope that there will come the day when nurbana will be finally implemented (and we will have something like MOI :-))