Hi, in this as easy as possible setup, I can’t get to work simple thing - extrude a Plane into a cube. Extrude Mesh node removes the original face. I can use the Join Geometry node, but the original face is not connected to the extruded faces. Theoretically I can use the Merge by Distance node, but this is horrible approach with bad results in my other, bigger setup.
The face normals are not corrected by the node. Not sure if it is a bug, but seems so.
The subdivision behaves weird cause the face normal of the origin face has the wrong direction.
You can see this if you turn on face orientanion in the viewport.
Fair enough, but GN has a lot of ways to achieve similar results… The whole Keep Faces debate has not affected me since I tend to use extrude to create paneling or buildings - which require insets, so I’ve never in a practical situation had a need to keep the bottom face when using the extrude mesh, and the things I extrude tend to have a preparation step which separates or creates boundaries, so merging has not been an issue yet.
If what you’re trying to create requires “closed” geometry, it may be better to use curve-to-mesh or to start with a Mesh Cube primitive… so, it could be that the problem may require a different way of stating it.
Side-by-side planes to extrude from to then subdivide? I’m struggling to understand your use-case.
Why not make the books first, use them as points, and distribute them on a mesh? That way you can extrude just one book however you want, change the scale/rot/loc easily, etc. it’ll be way easier than building a book on each vertex manually
Only in one very special case… 99.99999999% of the rest of the time it behaves like GN extrude.
Here is me starting with a cube, insetting, extruding and then deleting the bottom vertices.
… as you can see it doesn’t keep the face… so in fact, even when modeling, the behavior you describe and expect has never been my practical experience…
and, yes, GN’s building blocks are way more primitive and you require a lot more first-principle thinking or you’ll get lost (a lot of your modeling experience does carry across though, so it is still important knowledge).
Yess GN is lacking a proper inset node, that is more or less planned in the long term.
You’ve just pointed out the good and bad about GN : it’s full of minimalistic tools that allow to solve a lot of problems, and allow to make new tools to add more basic functionalities to GN.
But on the other hand, creating these new basic tools can become quite complicated.
For now dev’s works more on adding core functionalities like physics / loops etc… rather than adding the missing basic nodes. That second part is more or less done by the community.
There are a lot of missing nodes for modeling, like inset , bevels… These will come eventually.