Ah, thanks. I thought you were piping Geometry Nodes into Cycles and deforming the object via shader.
Curves is a usefull and great addition
Some other usefull feature that could be added later :
- Get object Faces array (get faces center)
- Object editing nodes (faces extrude bevel, edges subdivide and many more)
- Able to create UV loops or from vertex, faces, edges array, get created UV islands array
- Instace objects over object global surface by distance, volume distribution (not vertex based)
- Create new material with name and random or values color, and assign it to objects
- assign materials to UV islands
Disgusting growth effect
Distributed points pushed along normal direction, then displaced using sort of vector field created from noise texture, points to volume and volume to mesh
I hope that in near future we can get volume filters and volume booleans nodes to greatly improve volumes workflows
So now we can show the value of nodes in the spreadsheet which is exiting, and it opens up the abilities I thought of earlier, but in a better way.
Instances will be made real when a geometry nodes modifier is applied.
This is essentially meant to ensure the user is not confused when he clicks the ‘apply’ button (as what you see is what you will get). For instance, you can currently remesh a bunch of instances into one solid volume, but applying removes that detail.
I hope you’re happy this is disgusting…
and amazing !!
As linked objects, I suppose ? I don’t see it clearly said
Will the boolean math and sockets ever come to shader nodes? I can see that being very useful for nodegroups, especially when combined with something like the “switch” node in the compositor.
This means grid point distribution is also possible…
I would also use an add vector node right before the offset so you can add additional offset to your array.
Or you could just plug the multiply into the input but that does not give you as much precise control.
It’s called “work around”, will never be as good as the real “Array node” if it ever gets implemented.
What do you mean? It is implemented. The whole point of geo nodes was to allow people to have the power to do anything they need. This is more powerful in a way, because you can change it to your needs. At this point, why would you ever want an array node if you can make a nodegroup like this?
Here is a slightly more complete nodetree that allows the option of an object offset. This is almost getting good enough to delete the original array modifier and replace it with a “preset” as I imagine all modifiers will eventually.
Although, it’s annoying that the boolean widgets don’t show up in the modifier when you input them from the nodetree. I hope this will be fixed soon.
I did not understood “Line” node as “Array”.
Why waste time making nodes when “Array” modifier already does that in one click ?
Instead of “Line” object would it be more simple to create an “Array” node with options like :
“Shape” : Line , Circle , Follow Curve object
But that’s exactly what’s being done here. It’s a node tree packaged into a group that you can name “array” if you want. Add a few options and we’ll get to feature parity. Having -some- modifiers as node groups allows anyone to dive in and change how they work to adapt it to their needs.
All a line is is an array of vertices connected by edges. Why waste time waiting for the devs to make an array node when you already can with the nodes that currently exist? Like I said, I imagine all the modifiers will eventually become geometry nodes presets. We want low level nodes because they are more powerful overall.
If i want to make an array from scratch , let’s say 2D with values like position, dimension and intervall quickly wihtout having to instance vertices ?
Some sort of virtual Array for any usage ?
Be able to do some math or functions using arrays as parameters ?
It’s perhaps even more low level and more powerfull, more easy to manipulate for any purposes.
Or i missed some things and i’ll have to try it in Blender alpha 3.