Dynamic Remesh 2.5 -Quad-based remeshing/retopology

What a bummer. And here I was thinking that I paid U$15 for some kind of code sorcery or revolutionary code. The worst part is: I already saw someone showing similar steps to produce an “autoretopo”, but since the mesh wasn’t so dense, the resulting pattern wasn’t as recognizable, so I didn’t connect it to this result. I even dismissed the method as “not good enough”, what an irony.

1 Like

I had the impression as well that I would get a new remesh algorithm as well in Blender.
It’s ok, that there is an addon using the already build-in tools with a single click, but then it would be nice if that is explained in the description of the addon. If you compare big addons, like hardops 20 dollars I believe, and this addon 15 dollars, isn’t it.
That is really out of proportion.

1 Like


I’m not sure I understand. Alberto has created a very nice tool to achieve a specified result. Of course one can take the time to create their own code and/or use modifiers and/or build a workflow to achieve similar results. And of course one can edit vertex by vertex to create even better results. I suspect it all depends on how valuable you believe your time is worth.

FWIW, it’s all algorithms. Whether you’re using Blender, 3DC, Quadriflow, Instant Meshes or others, they all have their own algorithms. An algorithm is a recipe, and that’s exactly what Alberto has done. He’s used his expertise in Blender to create an algorithm to solve a problem. His algorithm uses existing Blender tools, just like hundreds of the other Blender addons do.

If I charge $100/hr and this tool saves me 16 minutes over a lifetime of using it, then I’m already in the black. Of course the value you place on your time may vary.

Wow…really? You’re publishing source code from someone’s hard work here on an open forum? Great, now when the rush comes to obfuscate all Blender addon source code, we can look to you as the culprit who started it all. Such a community-friendly approach

1 Like

Hum, IPv6 hasn’t published the source code, even if he can as all blender addons are GPL.
He is doing user feedback, and that can help someone decide if the addon is worth it or not.
Also that explain very well some strange topology on the remeshed models.

All these complains goes to the fact that it’s easy to recreate once you know how the internal works.
Take Hard ops, it’s easy to understand what the addon is doing and what functions of blender it’s using. But still it’s a timesaver and totally worth it, because you’ll work faster and also re-doing the addon by yourself is a huge amount of work. Revealing the internals shouldn’t make people reconsider the price or the efficiency of the product.


Under hundred lines of code where nothing is an original algorithm. No original formula dealing with remesh. (Just a particular order of subsurf, shrinkwrap and decimate modifier) A 6kb file.
Compare this with a few others;

Dynremesh: 6kb
Cuber: 87kb
Ice Tools Pro: 89kb
MeshMachine: 856kb (Without assets, just the tools) If you take a look at the coding of MeshMachine, we’re talking about something completely different. This addon for example comes with new things that would be (nearly) impossible with only the build in tools of blender.


Hum, IPv6 hasn’t published the source code

Really, my mistake. I thought his post actually did show source code. What here am I missing?

I know I’ve purchased many a Gumroad package in the past, for much more $$$, which explained to me how to do something…should I ask for a refund now that I know how to do it?


Then ask for a refund. I’m sure he’ll accommodate (as he’s already offered to). Much easier than trashing him and his product on this board.

Just because it isn’t right for you, doesn’t mean others can’t use it.

1 Like

Hum, it’s just a regular python command, and it’s even not complete. You can’t do anything with it.
It’s not like he posted the whole addon ( which is totally legal because blender’s addons are GPL ) or the part that do the trick. That would have been at least a bit unfair.
To me it’s just some user feedback, taking these informations I won’t buy the addon and I won’t try to recreate the system either. Maybe I’ll look into Quadriflow and try to compile it. DynRemesh is just not a product for me and IPv6 has just clarified all this, so thanks !

1 Like

100 lines of code is

just a regular python command

I never said anything was illegal, just in bad form. Using your GPL reasoning, why wouldn’t someone just go ahead and copy/paste all the popular addons and their source code in full on this forum?

And…you didn’t even BUY his product-- yet you’re good to come on here and trash it. Why not support him and his creative effort? Why not encourage authors instead of break them down?

1 Like

No one is trashing anything. It’s just pretty disappointing to discover that you basically spent U$15 for something so basic. So simple that the author feels threatened by someone finding out his addon is easily replicable.

Blender users are pretty desperate for good auto retopo methods, so when there’s anything new we invest in it on a blink of an eye, expecting some new algorithm or something, so we, especially people who bought it, have all the right to feel disappointed that we spent our money on something that could be done with a couple of modifiers, especially because the author gave the impression to be able to control the flow with grease pencil in the future. Well, now we know that, unless he rewrites it from the ground up or submits some patch to Blender’s decimate modifier, we’ll never see this feature.


Hey, what I just wanted to point out is that no-one as pasted working python code from this addon. Nor some code that you can take and recreate something from.

I don’t think that just because he wrote something and want to sell it I must be supportive.
I find that there are many addons that are barely few lines of code and just some clever macro that get sell on the blender market.
If you want to compare, just take a look at NukePedia or free vs paid stuff here : http://hocuspocus-studio.fr/tools/shop/
It’s ok for people to sell simple addons, it’s ok for people to buy them, it’s also ok for people to complain or argue against it.

1 Like

People don’t do this (even if they can) because they are respectful toward addons developers, and that’s great. But it should go both way, devs should give a fair price for their products, and also be clear about what to expect from them. If people start to argue it’s just that there may be something wrong don’t you think ?

1 Like

I do agree with those saying the mob mentality isn’t exactly helpful.

Even though this addon may be a clever sequence of built-in Blender operations, there is an actual market for shortcuts so it is a given that people will buy it. The vast majority of Cycles shaders on the Blendermarket for instance are just node groups that are possible for anyone to make, but in many cases, remaking it is not exactly easy.

However, this should be coupled with honest marketing. The title of the addon contains the word “anisotropic”, this suggested to me that it would define the mesh’s features in a way similar to the retopology tools in packages like Zbrush using a custom algorithm. Now it’s very possible he added some of his own math though.

Now a retopo algorithm that would be impressive to see is one that highly defines features while minimizing the appearance of ornate patterns in the resulting mesh.


YES. You make a good point.

What I am selling is a process made automatic within Blender.

I understand that I should have been more clear about what was going on, but it would defeat the purpose of commercial plugins if you post exactly how it works.

Like I said, I don’t mind anyone knowing the process, It just really sucks on my side ,as I am trying to improve the tool,when someone tells me to improve the add-on otherwise they will keep the post up, it’s that kind of attitude that shows no respect…

Anyway, If you feel that this tool was not worth your money, I am open to any refunds. Please let me know if you have any other review or feature request in order to better improve DynRemesh.

I appreciate the feedback!


1 Like

Hello Alberto. Thank you for mentioning you do refunds.

In truth, I’d like to request one. Your addon isn’t bad at all but I have other free addons that essentially do the same thing (E.G. the unofficial Instant Meshes addon). The I.M. addon doesn’t always produce the best topology but I feel it creates better edge flows and such, despite the hiccups and the occasional edits meshes may require.

Please PM your email.

1 Like

Should I PM you my default email address or the one connected to my Paypal?

The one used to purchase the add-on. Sorry for the late respond.

Well I can kinda see why people here seem to be disappointed. I was also under the impression that it was a custom algorithm when I bought it.

But whether it is a custom algorithm or not it still works doesn’t it?
And if this continues to get updated then I’d consider it well worth $15. The flow guides sound great and if you can manage to implement the quadriflow algorithm then that would be amazing.

I don’t want a refund, please use it to continue developing this addon :slight_smile:

1 Like